« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

MEMBER DIARY

What Is Going On With Senate Republicans? I Think I Know

It’s apparent Senate Republicans have made some kind of deal with Reid and Senate Democrats. But why?

Wasn’t there an election about a month and a 1/2 ago? Didn’t Republicans, including a lot of conservative Republicans, win six seats? Even with the election of squishy Mark Kirk, who took office right away as part of the combined special/general election for the seat previously held by Barack Obama and the Blago-tainted Roland Burris, Republicans were supposed to make things a bit more difficult for Harry Reid and the Democrats to finish their Christmas list of liberal crap bankrupting and weakening the country.

I figured the DADT repeal would pass; as far as I’m concerned, it was small potatoes compared to what the liberals have in store for us. Republicans stood firm to keep the DREAM Act from being an American nightmare. They held off Reid’s playing politics with the federal government’s budget by passing an omnibus spending bill after not passing ANY spending bill before the election. Reid even snuck in a version of an expansive new food safety law into his omnimess that had previously passed the Senate, but the House determined that version was unconstitutional since it had appropriations in it and didn’t originate there. And while Republicans did allow for the new START treaty to be debated, indications were that there wasn’t going to be any ratification until looking at it further next year.

Well guess what? Senate Republicans helped to pass the food safety bill by unanimous consent. And according to Ed Morrissey, they are all set to ratify START. While Reid spent most of the year playing political games at the expense of the American people to avoid the passage of any bill that could potentially harm Democrats’ chances at the election, he has been cajoling and bullying Senate Republicans to help him out. AND REPUBLICANS ARE DOING IT!!!

Republicans not only won six seats in the Senate, but 60 seats in the House, the greatest amount in decades. Republicans also won huge victories in state and local races all around the country. The reason was obvious; the people didn’t want to continue Obama and the Democrats’ continuing expansion of the federal government’s powers to micromanage the lives of every American. But for some reason, Senate Republicans want to make nice with Reid and his cohorts; didn’t they learn from 2006 and 2008 that when Republicans act like Democrats as if making a deal with Mephistopheles, they get replaced by real Democrats who have no interest in including Republicans or conservative policies, as the current session of Congress proved. To Democrats, a compromise still includes ever expanding power of the federal government over the people.

The only thing I can think of that is causing all this Republican caving is that when the 112th Congress begins, the first thing that has to be done is to pass the Senate rules for the session. One of Democrats’ biggest complaints has been the filibuster, having to lock up 60 votes for cloture to end debate on most items. The left wants the Senate to be more “democratic” (when Democrats are in charge) and have the rules changed so that cloture only requires a simple majority of the entire Senate; I believe Senate rules changes at the beginning of a session of Congress only need a simple majority. And since the Democrats will retain their majority, they can pass the change even if every Republican votes against it. So I’m guessing that Republicans have a deal with Reid in which they stop blocking votes to keep the filibuster in place for the 112th Congress as it is today, at 60 votes for cloture.

I don’t know about this. I don’t trust Reid and the Democrats to keep their word on anything, but I’m not in the Senate. As it is, the Democratic majority in the Senate would be able to stop any conservative measure passed in the House. And like I said, a compromise to a Democrat still includes increasing the federal government’s power, so it isn’t as if Republicans can do what they want, even with their large advantage in the House. Additionally, the liberal media will do everything they can to paint Republicans as thinking only of party instead of the country, even while never chastising Democrats for doing the same thing. It isn’t fair, but life isn’t fair; additionally, the people ignored much of this media BS and swept Republicans into office at all levels of government. But, one must remember history; Republicans were affected somewhat negatively when Gingrich and Clinton butted heads; and even though Republicans retained a majority in Congress, Clinton did get re-elected.

The Senate wasn’t designed to be another version of the House of Representatives, which could be behind McConnell’s thinking. Thanks to the 17th Amendment and the passage of history since that time, U.S. Senators don’t represent their states nearly like they used to; Democrat Ben Nelson’s vote to end debate on Obamacare over the objections of the Nebraska state government shows that graphically. But retaining the filibuster at least left some semblance of that, albeit in a greatly reduced form. It’s possible McConnell and Senate Republicans are thinking long term for the benefit of the country, although it really hurts America in the short term (see Ed’s post on what some Senate Republicans are saying is missing from the new START treaty).

What do you think?

COMMENTS

  • usadying

    between Reid and McConnell. Budget postponement for START and DADT? If so, McConnell got schnookered. Reid will make life miserable for the Republicans, and Obama will veto anything that looks like it might cut something from his beloved health and financial reforms. McConnell probably thought it was the best he could do. But the Dems are laughing all the way to the bank. They got their holy grails, and the Senate will stop anything that could chip away at them.

    • fpete13527
  • cwilson

    …depends on the determination that the Senate is not a “continuing body”. See, the entire House is re-elected every two years, so it has to vote anew for its rules in each congress.

    However, the Senate only replaces one-third of its members, so the Senate as an institution “continues”…and its rules remain in place. This is actually codified in Senate Rule V:

    The rules of the Senate shall continue from one Congress to the next Congress unless they are changed as provided in these rules.

    The rule governing how to change the rules is Senate Rule XXII:

    Notwithstanding the provisions of rule II or rule IV or any other rule of the Senate, at any time a motion signed by sixteen Senators, to bring to a close the debate upon any measure, motion, other matter pending before the Senate, or the unfinished business, is presented to the Senate, the Presiding Officer, or clerk at the direction of the Presiding Officer, shall at once state the motion to the Senate, and one hour after the Senate meets on the following calendar day but one, he shall lay the motion before the Senate and direct that the clerk call the roll, and upon the ascertainment that a quorum is present, the Presiding Officer shall, without debate, submit to the Senate by a yea-and-nay vote the question:

    ?Is it the sense of the Senate that the debate shall be brought to a close?? And if that question shall be decided in the affirmative by three-fifths of the Senators duly chosen and sworn ? except on a measure or motion to amend the Senate rules, in which case the necessary affirmative vote shall be two-thirds of the Senators present and voting ? then said measure, motion, or other matter pending before the Senate, or the unfinished business, shall be the unfinished business to the exclusion of all other business until disposed of.

    So, asserting that they can change the rules by a simple majority violates both Rule V and Rule XXII…which ought to be challenged by the Republicans, leaving it to the Parliamentarian to determine.

    Now, the ruling of the Parliamentarian can be overridden, I believe, but that too requires a supermajority…I think.

    For a more thorough discussion by Brian Darling who knows this stuff well, see here

  • fpete13527

    The Dem Coms have been playing the filibuster threat since ObamaCare passage……AND THE WIMP REPUBLICANS FELL FOR IT EVERY TIME.

    The GOP needs to FIGHT and let the filibuster fall where it falls.

    While the pathetic GOP Senate has been caving in FEAR of the filibuster, Obama and the DemComms have passed 98% of their agenda.

    The GOP Senate also hasnt forught hard because they like the porgressive mindset to a degree and dont want to give it up.
    You can see this from the Senate and House pushing COnservative leadership to the side and keeping the progresive RINO’s in full power positions.

    The GOP Senate performance has been a disgarce. If they are not pushed, they will continue to not fight and remain pure squish. AS we speak, they are allowing the ILLEGAL takeover of the of the Internet by Obama.

    The GOP Senate gets a D minus in my book and they are moving downward. They need to get yet another wake-up call.

    • runner12

      They need to be ousted as soon as possible.

  • cwilson

    The old bulls are completely irredeemable. Send them home, every last one of them. Rinse and repeat.

  • avgjo

    What would you have done, if you were the Republicans?

    I am thinking I would’ve told the little bstrds:

    “Fine, do it. You’re getting your butt handed to you in ’12 anyway. And Obama? That joke is getting replaced then too. If you do this, it’ll be hilarious to watch you whine and moan when we do it. President Palin/Gingrich/Cain is going to have a great time with this; I’ll leave it to your imagination what we’re gonna do to you, but you’re going to hate every moment of it.”

    Then again, I’m not a Senator, and there’s probably a host of things I don’t know and so I’m probably wrong.

    Please tell what you guys think.

    • avgjo

      I’d tell them,

      ‘When we tell our brothers and sisters in the House what you’ve pulled, you’re not gonna see a plugged nickel for anything. No lights, no fuel for your vehicles, nothing. ‘

      On this one, I do think I know how I’m wrong’; this has probably been funded already. Just venting.

    • avgjo

      I’d tell them,

      ‘When we tell our brothers and sisters in the House what you’ve pulled, you’re not gonna see a plugged nickel for anything. No lights, no fuel for your vehicles, nothing. ‘

      On this one, I do think I know how I’m wrong’; this has probably been funded already. Just venting.

  • http://www.theprecinctproject.wordpress.com ColdWarrior

    are going to DO about this politically.

    Not writing about it.

    Not talking about it.

    But, what, specifically, we’re going to do.

    cwilson suggests we “primary everybody.” That’s a good “what.” Which begs the question: How do we, as conservatives, primary all the incumbents? What does each of us have to do to assure a constitutional conservative Republican challenger has a snowball’s chance in hell of beating an incumbent in the 2012 primary?

    Here’s a game plan that was followed by grass roots conservatives in the 2010 election cycle that successfully denied an incumbent RINO senator a chance to even get onto the primary ballot:

    http://www.redstate.com/coldwarrior/2010/05/08/2101-of-3500-of-75000-denied-bob-bennett/

    Here’s a few examples where grass roots conservatives became ball players in the real ball game of politics — party politics — rather than continuing to stand on the sidelines and talk about what was happening on the ball field — and now they control their party committee:

    http://www.redstate.com/coldwarrior/2010/12/04/they-stopped-complaining-about-the-republican-party-and-did-something-about-it/

    I think we need to stop just talking about politics, and writing about politics, and actually get involved in the real ball game of politics — party politics — as full-fledged members of the Republican Party.

    What does that mean? Well, here’s a couple of examples of what participation inside the party, as a full-fledged voting member of it , garners you.

    On Jan. 8, I’ll be attending my county Republican Party organizational meeting along with, potentially, all 2,935 other elected precinct committeemen in my county. We’re going to be electing officers. And voting on changes to the bylaws. And voting on resolutions relating to what we believe as a Party and want to have in our Platform. And, one of two things is going to happen. Either conservative Republicans are going to outnumber moderate and RINO Republicans there on that day, or the moderate and RINOs are going to outnumber the conservatives. And that will determine whether, for the next two years, we’ve got conservatives in charge of the county committee or moderates and RINOs. (I make a distinction between moderates and RINOs because many of the moderates are actually pretty conservative, in my experience, but just have a couple of issues that might cause them to not think of themselves as conservatives. The RINOs, on the other hand, truly are Republicans in name only — they are progressives who don’t believe in anything except the progressive agenda and use the Party apparatus as one of their tools to advance their agenda. Then there are the MINOs (pronounced mynose) — Moderates in name only. These folks are actually conservative, but don’t want anyone to know. They’re afraid, for example, that they might lose friends, or invitations to parties, if anyone knew how they really think. They won’t even put up a sign for a conservative Republican candidate in their yard because then their neighbors might think they were — heaven forbid! — a conservative Republican. I’ve met many of these MINOs. Good people, but not too willing to take a public stand on issues and what they believe. But, thankfully, they’ll vote for conservatives every time.)

    In 2008, our current conservative chairman was elected by a margin of less than one half of one per cent of the votes cast, defeating a well-known McCain RINO.

    Then, on January 22, I’ll be attending the Arizona Republican Party organizational meeting as an elected state committeeman representing my legislative district, where the same thing will happen regarding the election of state committee officers, including a new state chairman (who also serves as an RNC delegate). I’ll be attending because I was lucky enough to be elected by my fellow precinct committeemen to represent them (each legislative district committee gets to nominate one state committeeman for every three elected precinct committeemen). So, indirectly, those of us who attend will have a say on who becomes the next RNC chairman (we elected our other two RNC delegates a year ago at another, similar, annual meeting).

    In 2008, our outgoing conservative chairman, Randy Pullen, won against a well-known former McCain staffer and moderate by less than one per cent of the votes cast.

    Here’s the kicker: Over half of the elected precinct committeeman slots are vacant. Which means, if we could find enough conservative Republicans to fill up just half of those empty slots, or even ten per cent of them, we conservatives would own the Arizona Republican Party, because right now, by my estimation, conservatives occupy about 60 per cent of the filled precinct committeeman slots.

    If we conservatives, in 2011 and 2012, flock into the Party in droves, everywhere, we could change the outcome of the 2012 Republican primary elections as they did in Utah.

    So, I think conservatives who are on the sidelines of party politics need to, if possible, get into the ball game by becoming precinct committeemen. It’s not hard to do. It’s not expensive. It only takes a little bit of time. Every state has a different set of rules; none are onerous.

    If not you, who? In not now, when?

    If not this, then please tell me a better strategy for taking control of the Republican Party and, hence, changing the outcome of the all-important, traditionally-very-low-turnout primary elections.

    See my little blog linked below if you’d like more information about what I call The Neighborhood Precinct Committeeman Strategy.

    I propose we conservatives quit complaining about “the Republican Party” and become part of it. And, thereby, changing it. From a half-strength, ideologically-split shell of a political party into a full-strength, conservative political juggernaut.

    It’s just sitting there for the taking.

    Thank you.

    For Liberty,

    ColdWarrior

    • avgjo

      I think is part of our version. Thanks for all you’re doing.

      I was lurking over at another conservative site, and they were talking about your PC project. There seemed to be a good bit of interest. Hopefully…

      • http://www.theprecinctproject.wordpress.com ColdWarrior

        Thanks,
        CW

        • avgjo

          http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2645113/posts?page=284#284

    • cwilson

      The Tea Party “organizations” do not appear well organized here, and it seems to me many have been infiltrated by Paultards and other agent provocateurs.

      In the November REC meeting, one guy was complaining that a new proposed bylaw that limited distribution of campaign material to republican candidates only (or candidates in a non-partisan election) — in the Republican Executive Committee meeting room!! — was an “unconstitutional” imposition on his right to free speech. Or press. Or something.

      Because the Republican party has a duty to allow the Libertarian Party campaign materials in its own meeting room or something. Very similar to the rather uninformed comments we get here about “free speech” on this private web site.

      Anyway, this fellow was one of the newly installed committeemen, and was part of the new insurgency. Like me. Only, he and others like him, with their idiocy, appear to have pushed the old guard into an even more hard line opposition to us new comers. My own (incumbent) district chair made a comment to that effect…

      So…here’s how the officer elections went:

      Chairman: go-along-get-along incumbent: 86
      Tea Party/Conservative insurgent: 57

      Vice-Chairman: incumbent (who was apparently rather libertarian-leaning to begin with; founder of the Brevard Liberty Caucus): 87
      Tea Party/Conservative insurgent: 53

      Secretary: incumbent unopposed
      Treasurer: incumbent did not run; only one other candidate.

      Now, it’s possible that many of the committeemen felt the “incumbent” officers deserved more time to prove themselves, as our entire officer core was apparently replaced only six months ago after some fallout from the FLGOP crisis. This was before I became a committeeman so I’m not sure.

      But…it’s clear we have more work to do, even here in ultra-conservative Brevard county (55-44 McCain, in 2008).

      • http://www.theprecinctproject.wordpress.com ColdWarrior

        What percentage of your allotted voting slots were filled?

        For example, currently my legislative district has 273 slots for precinct committeemen for the 25,722 active registered Republican voters. But, despite recruitment efforts by me and others, we’ve only got 112 precinct committeemen (up from about 65 two years ago), and only 103 showed up, in person or by proxy, for the leadership elections, which I reported on here:

        www.redstate.com/coldwarrior/2010/12/04/they-stopped-complaining-about-the-republican-party-and-did-something-about-it/

        Just trying to find out what the relative “strength” of the Party is in your neck of the woods. Also, assuming you are at less than 100 per cent participation, what are your thoughts on whether you’ll be able to attract more conservatives to your local committee to bring it up to greater strength?

        Thank you.

        ColdWarrior

        • cwilson

          My impression — but I have no hard numbers — is that somewhat less than half of our slots are empty, but /more/ than half are empty in my own district. One guy stumping for FLGOP Chairman commented that Brevard County appeared to have a larger contingent present at that particular meeting than many of the other county REC meetings he had spoken to recently (‘course, he could have been stroking our collective ego).

          I’ve invited several folks I know to join me (even offering to drive the 20 miles to our “county seat” for the meetings), but only one has taken the offer. One meeting of the “Wow, this reminds me of the Elks Club” was his last. :-(

          Part of the problem ’round here is, our County apparatus usually ends up on the Right side of the issues, and the candidates, so many people don’t see the need to join. (Our little part of the GOP doesn’t seem that broken to most people). Now, for the really plugged in, or once you’re on the inside, you start to see some ugly warts that need fixin’ … but there’s no question these warts aren’t on the “WTH did you nominate Lefty McLiberal for Senate?” level of concern…

  • http://www.gmsplace.com/ civil_truth

    1) They want to go back to business as usual, splitting the pork and feathering their reelection nests with lobbyist money

    2) They are convinced they can get away with it.

  • wonkish1

    They want to switch the rules to where someone filibustering actually has to go up and filibuster. And other changes like that.

    As far as I know they don’t want remove 60 which would be stupid politically for them. Also to many Dems(as all senators) like the more power each and every one of them have when the number is 60 instead of 50. It makes each senator more valuable.

    So we’ll see, but frankly if all the propose is that people actually have to filibuster, I don’t really care.

    If they try to do away with 60 votes, I’m hard pressed to believe it will pass.

  • Ausonius

    ColdWarrior is quite right about The Precinct Project. Grass-roots action by Conservatives will have a long-term benefit.

    Primary challenges are another obvious solution, but not easy: money and more money is needed to boot out an incumbent, and then you need a decent replacement (rf. Delaware).

    Replacing the present chairman of the Republican Party is also obvious as a solution: having a RINO run the party has not been to our advantage.

    But allow me to assert that just as important as these things is indeed talking and writing! e.g. RedState contains (most of the time :) ) excellent argumentation as to WHY Conservatism is the answer.

    These ideas need to be spread!

    Due to 60 years of Leftism infecting the schools, Conservatism as a natural and logical political philosophy is not something that obviously occurs to many people. We still need to make our case constantly. We need to activate people who should be on our side, but for various reasons are not.

    For example…

    Conservative (theologically) Afro-American churches should be a natural target for us, since the Democrat Party is actively hostile to much of what they believe. The contradictory nature of the ill logic of a Bible-believer voting for any Dem needs to be pointed out, diplomatically of course, but it needs to happen.

    “Typical Republicans” (like Senate RINO’S) give up at the beginning, afraid of even attempting to address such groups, and giving the lie that Conservatism is crypto-racism a patina of truth.

    • fpete13527

      In addtion to active participation in Precinct Project, I hope that the writing and SPEAKING from those similar to RedState can get quadrupled.

      Actually it must get quadrupled.