Senate Democrats Bungle Filling Vacant Seats
No wonder President-elect Barack "no drama" Obama demands that the Democrats and few Republicans in his cabinet conduct themselves without soap opera-like dramatics: he knows them. Calculated cool, not red-hot drama, is his style.
Take Senate Democrats, for instance. Obama can ostensibly control his cabinet. What he apparently can't control are the embarrassing As-the World-Turns proclivities of Senate Democrats in the 111th Congress, which takes office on January 6, 2009, next Tuesday.
The 111th Congress should be a good one for Senate Democrats: As of today, Democrats hold 55 Senate seats, plus both Independents plan to caucus with Democrats, which is the largest party majority in the U.S. Senate in almost 20 years.
In contrast, Senate Republicans hold only 41 seats in the 111th Congress, a catastrophic loss of 14 seats in merely two election cycles, or four years. And by all accounts, Senate Republicans are demoralized and out of ideas.
So Senate Democrats should be celebrating the New Year with a kumbaya glow of peace, love and massive control and influence... right?
Think again. While the scramble to chair influential Senate Committees is settled for the 111th Congress, and Senate Democratic top leadership spots have been filled, the high drama over filling three Senate seats has been bungled badly by Democrats grasping for political power.
Obama must be horrified by the spectacle. As the Wall Street Journal observed, "For those who thought the new era of Democratic governance would be dull, we present this year's Senate replacement follies."
Illinois Senate Seat
The cast of characters in the messy drive to fill Obama's vacated Senate seat is cartoon-like, and includes a greedy, foul-mouthed, Yosemite Sam lookalike Democratic governor, his equally greedy, foul-mouthed wife, and the apparently foul-mouthed, sharp-elbowed new Chief of Staff for Obama, who is suddenly visiting distant Africa during this brouhaha.
Gov. Blagojevich, who is under both impeachment proceedings and possible corruption charges by the U.S. Attorney, was warned to not nominate Obama's Senate successor. But of course, he did nominate someone, former Illinois Attorney General Roland Burris, who, of course, is a major cash contributor to the governor's career.
Word has it that Burris plans to show up to Senate swearing-in ceremonies next Tuesday. Senate Democrats say they won't seat him. Yet quite a few contitutional lawyers, including one in U.S. News & World Report , claim that "Under the 1969 Supreme Court case of Powell v. McCormack, the Senate has no right at all to do that."
Will Burris show up to be sworn in as U.S. Senator from Illinois? If so, will there be an ugly scene between Burris and U.S. Senate's sergeant at arms?
Reports CNN, "(An) aide familiar with Senate Democratic leaders' plans said if Burris tries to enter the Senate chamber, the Senate doorkeeper will stop Burris. If Burris were to persist, either trying to force his way onto the Senate floor or refusing to leave and causing a scene, U.S. Capitol Police would stop him... "
Also, why in the heck did Obama unnecessarily wade into this murky morass by siding with not seating Roland Burris?
All things considered, Obama, his Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel, and Senate Democrats alike badly mismanaged this appointment. As a result, they appear inept, small-minded and even faintly corrupt in the process.
Minnesota Senate Seat
Obviously, the historically and deeply bitter, unresolved Minnesota Senate race was an electoral tie between Democrat Al Franken and Republican incumbent Norm Coleman. Of more than 2.4 million votes cast for the two candidates, Franken leads by about 50 votes, after extensive recounting.
(See Profile of Al Franken, Comedian and 2008 Senate Candidate.)
The fairest solution would be a run-off election between the two, but that isn't a legal option.
As of today, one political analyst predicts about this hopelessly complex dispute:
"The recount has been complicated by thousands of ballot challenges. The state's ad hoc Canvassing Board has been charged with resolving the disputes, and on Monday Franken goes into a meeting of the board with a soft 49-vote lead."Further challenges could stretch the board's work deeper into 2009. One such delay has been virtually assured by the Coleman camp... "
At times, Democrat Franken has behaved poorly in this Minnesota Senate race. Republican Coleman has likewise behaved poorly, and has repeatedly used cheap legal tricks to extend the recount on and on and on, beyond all reason. And Senate Republicans may filibuster the seating of Franken.
If a run-off election was held now, Minnesota voters might not select either Franken or Coleman as their U.S. senator, but might opt for a third, unbloodied candidate.
If Franken prevails, as seems the likeliest outcome, he will start with a tarnished image. And Democrats will be embarrassed by association.
New York Senate Seat
The drive to fill Hillary Clinton's soon-to-be-vacated New York Senate seat has morphed into a catty mud-slinging skirmish, replete with dynastic Democratic names, fake letters planted in the New York Times, and lots and lots of rumors, name-calling and jockeying for headlines.
Once Caroline Kennedy, Important Friend of Obama, unexpectedly tossed her designer hat into the race, shocked Friends of Bill and Hillary reacted by hissing charges that Caroline is unqualified, inexperienced, and not familiar with the problems of average New Yorkers.
Never mind that during her 2000 Senate Run, Hillary was accused of exactly the same charges, and has been an outstanding Senate member. And unlike Caroline, who has resided in New York for decades, carpetbagger Hillary had lived in New York for a nano-minute. But then again, lack of hypocrisy has never been a strong suit for Clintons.
Word has it that the Clintons want to continue to exert control over that Senate seat, presumably in case Hillary's Secretary of State gig doesn't work out to her political satisfaction.
The landmark nomination of timeless political celebrity Caroline Kennedy, the only living child of iconic, martyred Democratic President John F. Kennedy, to the New York Senate seat would probably erase Hillary's senatorial reign from all memory.
Yesterday, the inevitable Bill Clinton story surfaced , suggesting that "The former president is among several boldface names being touted as possible 'caretakers' for New York's Senate seat -- people who would serve until the 2010 elections but wouldn't be interested in running to keep the job. "
Caroline Kennedy is an experienced education reformer, a Constitutional attorney and scholar, and the author of a number of best-selling books on U.S. law, the Constitution and U.S. history and patriotic culture. She's also a longtime student of U.S. politics, having listened and learned about the issues since childhood.
In short, Kennedy is as well qualified as at least half of sitting U.S. Senators when they first joined that august body. Of course, many other New York candidates are equally qualified, and should be equally considered. Undoubtedly, Gov. David Paterson will do just that.
But the tacky, tacky gracelessness shown by New York Democrats, particularly those friendly with Hill and Bill, in selecting the next junior senator from New York is another squalid embarrassment for Senate Democrats as they kick-off the 111th Congress.
Where Is the Change We Can Believe In?
President-elect Obama promised Americans "change you can believe in." Hopefully, he can exert some measure of control over Senate Democratic foolishness.
The only change I sense, thus far, among Senate Democrats is heightened jockeying for political power.
In partnership with a Democratic president elected by a landslide mandate, the 111th Congress has been blessed with the historic opportunity to implement true reform, and to change the course of post-Bush America.
Will Senate Democrats lead this country out of the mire? Or will they continue to be mired in self-interested politics?
Far as I can tell, the jury is still out. But the telltale signs aren't good.
(All photos by Getty Images)
Comments
“If Franken prevails, as seems the likeliest outcome, he will start with a tarnished image. And Democrats will be embarrassed by association.”
You’re right, but you don’t go far enough. Democrats should relinquish every Senate seat that we won by less than 100%. If the victory wasn’t that solid, then the people’s will is being violated. Oh wait, you’re not right, you’re an idiot.
This post could have been written by the GOP. Franken will have a “tarnished image??” Would have Coleman have the same “tarnished image” if he were to prevail? Of ocurse not. The Republicans act as if winning is their birthrate, whereas Dems are supposed to be ashmaned of winning and lame “liberals” like Deborah White are pushing that message lock stock and barrel. Franken has shown what it takes to succeed in a recount situation, something Gore would have been well advised to do and spare us the past eight nightmarish years. But no, to Deborah White democracy is not as desirable as good manners and not being demanding, despite what the other side is doing. Pathetic.
If Franken prevails, as seems the likeliest outcome, he will start with a tarnished image. And Democrats will be embarrassed by association.
Why? If he actually gets more votes than Coleman, what is going to tarnish Franken’s image? And why would Democrats be embarrassed by winning an election, even if only by a small number of votes? This is typical Democratic behaviour, lamenting things they should be celebrating. A win is a win! Republicans never write these kind of hand-wringing pieces of crap – they do whatever it takes to win, and never look back. Democrats would do well to emulate them in that respect at least.
It’s called Democracy, Deborah. Sometimes it’s messy, sometimes it’s elegant, but it’s the way we elect the leaders who run things. Stop being so squeamish about it. Republicans have shown themselves to be morally bankrupt, and have done their best to destroy this country. Stop this ridiculous whining and embrace the new Democratic Majority.
The only tarnishing that is happening is the random meanderings of press and commenters who do not understand the process. A runoff is not an option because that is not how our system works. Arm wrestling will also not be an option. We have a system, and it is working, why don’t you just let us carry it out, complete the process, and send our senator to Washington?
You state that Franken has behaved poorly but this is pretty much an example, on your part, of trying to give “fair and balanced” coverage … the facts are there and they are clear. Franken has behaved very well, and Coleman mostly has not (but he could have been worse, I suppose).
We will be happy to be sending which ever candidate wins to the Senate despite the incorrect feeling on the part of a lot of relatively ignorant commenters and press that we don’t know what we are doing in Minnesota. We will be especailly happy if it is Franken that we send!
Deborah,
If Coleman wins, do you think he will start his second term with a tarnished image, and that Republicans should be embarrassed by association? If so, why? And if not, why not? How is one or the other “tarnished” by winning an insanely close election?
Can you specify instances where Franken has “behaved poorly”? You gave some vague instances where Coleman has done so, but you didn’t provide any instances of Franken doing so.
Also: you say Obama and his incoming administration “appear inept, small-minded and even a bit corrupt” in relation to the scandal involving the Illinois governor. That is a pretty hefty charge; please elaborate. We all know that Blago was frustrated with Obama because all he was going to get was “appreciation” if he chose the POTUS-elect’s preferred candidate. And that they worked with Fitzgerald every step of the way. Now, is that inept, small-minded or corrupt on Obama’s part?
I look forward to your fleshing out these issues that you raised and failed to back up, or just plain wandered away from.
Oh, gracious.
Are new yorkers being all tackily undemocratic? Let’s see – we must be raging partisans who are injecting our feelings about the Clintons into a race we know little about – after all, we don’t want our Senator to be a first time jobholder whose main qualification for office is her ability to channel her dead father’s endorsement for politicians from out of town. Particularly if the whole mess is a political gift to us from Mike Bloomberg, the Republican billionaire who’s trying to buy a third term in City Hall (like he already bought a city council end run around voter-approved term limits) and an team from Illinois who maybe should have been meddling a bit closer to home.
Presumably you know something about the profoundly embarassing Democratic politics in your own state. You might want to stick to making categorical statements about that.
In previous years, I witnessed several elections where the winner held a one vote margin after all votes were recounted. They were legitimate, in court, and in the eyes of the electorate as a whole.
Deborah,
What is your basis for this statement, “All things considered, Obama, his Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel, and Senate Democrats alike badly mismanaged this appointment. As a result, they appear inept, small-minded and even a bit corrupt in the process.”
There has been nothing suggesting any of those mentioned have done anything like you allege.
And this, “If Franken prevails, as seems the likeliest outcome, he will start with a tarnished image. And Democrats will be embarrassed by association.”
What has Franken done that tarnishes him? What have Democrats done here to be embarrassed about? Win?
Finally, this gem, “But the tacky, tacky gracelessness shown by New York Democrats, particularly those friendly with Hill and Bill, in selecting the next junior senator from New York is another squalid embarrassment for Senate Democrats as they kick-off the 111th Congress.”
Here, you allege “tacky, tacky gracelessness”, attributing it to “those friendly with Hill and Bill”, yet fail to provide any basis. What do you base this on?
Deborah, I think you are a hack political “journalist”, with a far brighter future at Fox News or Powerline that here at About.com. Here, facts are supposed to matter.
From Deborah White:
“I have a passion for liberal politics and progressive issues. My goal is to help you understand important issues and topics, and to introduce you to liberal leadership, both longtime and emerging, within our country. I also look forward to providing context and insightful commentary on current issues.”
Try again, please.
It sickens me that the Progressive side is not demanding accountability for the fact that the Dems, who in the last eight years allowed:
Alito,
Roberts,
Mukasey,
the Bankruptcy bill,
the FISA bill,
the “Patriot” Act,
ad nauseum, ad infinitum, etc.
can only mobilize to block …
the seating of 2 Democratic Senators.
Because, if we listen to the likes of you, they’re likely to be the real problems.
Franken wins!!!
Franken went into the final phase at 46+ and emerged at 225+ – a stunning increase of nearly 500% – and a clear, certain mandate from the people of Minnesota to govern as a far-left progressive/liberal.
His commanding 225 vote lead now utterly destroys Coleman’s original, paltry 215 vote lead by more than 4.6%!!
Republican whining and head-thrashing will commence shortly. Feel free to not join in. Thanks!
Why can’t Republicans
stealwin elections anymore?“Franken wins!!!”
Sorry Harry, the increased margin just makes Franken more tarnished — right, Deborah?
Mr. Sohl-
I also detest Alito, Roberts, Mukasey, the Bankruptcy bill,and especially the FISA bill,
and the “Patriot” Act. And I fully believe that Mr. Franken will make a brilliantly progressive senator. Indeed, Franken may end up being one of the most committed progressives, much like Paul Wellstone.
But I AM sick of the self-involved soap operas, control-freak self-interested attempts to sabotage or short-circuit fellow Democrats, and bad-faith, uber-partisan kneejerk reactions just because someone happens to view an issue a bit differently.
I totally agree with Barack Obama’s “no drama” edict. I expect our Democratic-controlled Congress to focus on solving the massive problems facing our nation, and not waste their energies and our time by remaining mired in their silly, unconstructive dramas.
Let’s get some work done for this nation, and not waste this historic opportunity!
THANK YOU for your thoughtful comments. I appreciate it!
Tarnished image for Franken? I live in Minnesota and this has been the most transparent, open, un-partisan recount imaginable. Four of the five people responsible for the recount are judges, two of whom were appointed by Gov. Pawlenty, a Republican. Franken should enter the Senate proudly. He won the election, For anyone to say he will enter the Senate with a tarnished image is insulting Minnesota voters and their ability to resolve serious issues. You should apologize for what you wrote.
In an election, if Caroline Kennedy was the Democratic nominee, I’m sure I would vote for her with pleasure. However, I think we have a rare opportunity right now to get an Upstate New Yorker into that Senate seat, and we Upstaters (who, without New York City, would be the 13th largest state by population) deserve representation for a change.
We can’t win because we can’t beat Downstate. They take all of our tax money, exempt themselves from laws that they pass on us, and otherwise make us pretty much hate them. We have earned the chance for advocacy, and Caroline Kennedy is NOT it.
“The fairest solution would be a run-off election between the two, but that isn’t a legal option.”
Good thing you aren’t in politics, you’d get eaten alive. Why would that be fair? Because it so close? How close is close enough for a do-over? If a team wins the Super Bowl by 1 point, is replaying the game the fairest thing to do? Whoever has the most votes as declared by the board of elections is the winner, despite your arbitrary sense of fairness.
I personally look forward to more Democrats doing embarrasing, image-tarnishing things like winning elections.