Congress: Same Operation, Different Management
Shortly after the pictures from Abu Ghraib hit the scene here in the United States, Senator Ted Kennedy took to the Senate floor to blast it as no different then when Saddam Hussein was running the place. I believe his exact words were some thing like "Abu Ghraib is still the place to torture Iraqis, it's just under different management." Kennedy's remarks might have been better served for his Democrat Party brethren in the House of Representatives.
One of the biggest complaints about the Republicans when they controlled Congress was their arm-twisting-tactics in getting members of their caucus to vote on measures. During the 2002 debate and vote on the Medicare prescription drug benefit, some Republicans complained that they would not have voted for this entitlement had it not been for the manner in which they were treated by the House Republican leadership, particularly Tom Delay. One such instance of arm twisting came when Delay promised one lawmaker that he would support his son in the mid-terms of 2002 if the lawmaker voted for the Medicare bill. The lawmaker said no and his son went down in defeat. And, of course, it was said that this was rampant in the Republican controlled Congress, which was turned into Republican "corruption," which in turn led to a Democrat victory in 2006.
The Democrats came to power in January of 2007 with the promise to the American voter to "clean up the corruption" left behind in the wake of Republican controll. But now, barely three months into their reign over the House, the Democrats have abandoned all efforts to govern the way they promised and adopted the same strategy of the Republicans.
The arm twisting is over the vote for the Iraq Supplemental which is going to cost $124 billion dollars. The President has asked for just $100 billion meaning that there is $24 billion of pork--something that was going to be elliminated under the Democrats. Speaker Pelosi is having a rough go at getting 218 votes for this measure and as such she is turning to some rather harsh tactics. According to The Hill she is threatening to remove members of the Democrat caucus from their committee chairmenships unless they for this measure. "[Pelosi] has been hardest on members of the Appropriations Committee and her fellow Californians who oppose the measure. The Speaker pointedly reminded Rep. Barbara Lee (D-Calif.), a leading opponent of the bill, that she had appointed her to the Appropriations Committee, three Democratic lawmakers said. The message was simple, the lawmakers said: Pelosi could also remove Lee from the panel." New management indeed.
Now, does this mean that the Democrats are in the wrong for doing this? No, it does not, just as it did not mean that the Republicans were wrong for doing this. But what it does mean is that the Democrats are two-faced when they were harping on the Republicans for doing much of the same. Applying pressure to the members of your caucus is a means to get them to vote for or against a bill. This is nothing new and it is not unethical; it's just business. The individual feeling the pressure has every right in the world to vote how he/she thinks is necessary, but the leadership has the right to apply pressure to the lawmaker. What is underhanded is calling one Party corrupt when doing business this way and then doing the same thing when the other Party is in power. Worse yet, is the gullibility of the American voter when it comes down to the demonization of this method of law making. It seems that every two years American voter is bombarded with cries of corruption, and it seems to never fail to get them worked up.
Source:
http://thehill.com/leading-the-news/its-tough-to-get-218-votes-so-speaker-gets-tough-too-2007-03-20.html
One of the biggest complaints about the Republicans when they controlled Congress was their arm-twisting-tactics in getting members of their caucus to vote on measures. During the 2002 debate and vote on the Medicare prescription drug benefit, some Republicans complained that they would not have voted for this entitlement had it not been for the manner in which they were treated by the House Republican leadership, particularly Tom Delay. One such instance of arm twisting came when Delay promised one lawmaker that he would support his son in the mid-terms of 2002 if the lawmaker voted for the Medicare bill. The lawmaker said no and his son went down in defeat. And, of course, it was said that this was rampant in the Republican controlled Congress, which was turned into Republican "corruption," which in turn led to a Democrat victory in 2006.
The Democrats came to power in January of 2007 with the promise to the American voter to "clean up the corruption" left behind in the wake of Republican controll. But now, barely three months into their reign over the House, the Democrats have abandoned all efforts to govern the way they promised and adopted the same strategy of the Republicans.
The arm twisting is over the vote for the Iraq Supplemental which is going to cost $124 billion dollars. The President has asked for just $100 billion meaning that there is $24 billion of pork--something that was going to be elliminated under the Democrats. Speaker Pelosi is having a rough go at getting 218 votes for this measure and as such she is turning to some rather harsh tactics. According to The Hill she is threatening to remove members of the Democrat caucus from their committee chairmenships unless they for this measure. "[Pelosi] has been hardest on members of the Appropriations Committee and her fellow Californians who oppose the measure. The Speaker pointedly reminded Rep. Barbara Lee (D-Calif.), a leading opponent of the bill, that she had appointed her to the Appropriations Committee, three Democratic lawmakers said. The message was simple, the lawmakers said: Pelosi could also remove Lee from the panel." New management indeed.
Now, does this mean that the Democrats are in the wrong for doing this? No, it does not, just as it did not mean that the Republicans were wrong for doing this. But what it does mean is that the Democrats are two-faced when they were harping on the Republicans for doing much of the same. Applying pressure to the members of your caucus is a means to get them to vote for or against a bill. This is nothing new and it is not unethical; it's just business. The individual feeling the pressure has every right in the world to vote how he/she thinks is necessary, but the leadership has the right to apply pressure to the lawmaker. What is underhanded is calling one Party corrupt when doing business this way and then doing the same thing when the other Party is in power. Worse yet, is the gullibility of the American voter when it comes down to the demonization of this method of law making. It seems that every two years American voter is bombarded with cries of corruption, and it seems to never fail to get them worked up.
Source:
http://thehill.com/leading-the-news/its-tough-to-get-218-votes-so-speaker-gets-tough-too-2007-03-20.html
posted by Robert A. McReynolds | 8:57 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home