Rendell: “Make Them Filibuster”

My favorite cause seems to have picked up a new spokesman: Pennsylvania Governor Ed Rendell.

We’ll see if the Little Girls of the United States Senate pay him any more attention than they have me. (In addition to the two links above, you can read more of my earlier arguments on this subject here, and here.)

Related Topics: Ed Rendell, filibuster, make them filibuster, Congress, Senate
  • Latest on Swampland

    The Phony War: Obama and Romney Are Debating Character, Not Policy

    More than five months from Election Day, the back-and-forth about Mitt Romney’s record at Bain already feels played out. Unfortunately, there’s good reason to expect the campaign continues in this vein indefinitely. Neither Barack Obama nor Mitt Romney are terribly interested in dwelling on policy platforms. Romney’s plan to slash spending and keep taxes low on the wealthy isn’t especially popular, at least not at any level of detail beyond a blithe promise to shrink the deficit. Meanwhile, Obama’s signature first-term achievements, like health care, the stimulus and Wall Street reform, are all unpopular or tricky to sell. (The Dodd-Frank bill is the most popular of these, but hyping it means offending wealthy donors.) So what we’re getting instead is a superficial duel about character–and, worse, one that’s based on the largely false premise that the better man can better “manage” the economy back to health.

    Obama Administration Blocks Global Health Fund To Fight Disease In Developing NationsHuffPost Politics

    Audacity of Dope: Tales of a Toking Teenage Obama

    We knew Barack Obama smoked weed in high school because he wrote about it in his books. What we didn’t know until Buzzfeed posted these choice nuggets (I’m so sorry) from David Maraniss’s new book on the President’s younger years, is the giggle-worthy details of his “Choom Gang” lifestyle, which are right out of a buddy stoner flick. Obama and his friends drove around the lush Hawaii countryside, hot-boxing their VW bus and re-upping with a long-haired pizza-tossing dealer named Ray, who Obama thanked in his yearbook “for all the good times.”

  • spob

    KT, ya think that some Dems don’t wanna pass this thing now? The GOP filibuster gives them some cover.

  • http://twitter.com/ktumulty Karen Tumulty

    By the way, my campaign is rooted in good government, not partisanship. My feeling is, no matter which party is in control of the Senate, if the minority wants to filibuster, they should have to Man Up. (Which is a totally sexist expression, but seems fitting here.)

  • kbanginmotown

    Sadly, KT, the GOP majority of 2000-2006 made an excellent spectacle of the Dems preventing “up or down votes” on Senate business. The Dems either caved or participated in a “Gang of X” to pass legislation.
    .
    Now that the Dems are in the majority, I’ve heard of neither an “up or down vote” nor a “Gang of” happening.
    .
    Any word if the head “Little Girl” has grown a pair since last week…?

  • shepherdwong

    Oh no, you don’t think the bi-partisan collegiality of the Democrats and deference to Senate “rules” is working out for them? Who could have predicted?

  • bobcn1

    KT,
    I’d be very interested to hear your response to this post at TPM: link

    It makes a pretty strong counter argument to “Make Them Filibuster” and describes a process that’s more difficult to change than I had previously thought.

  • kbanginmotown

    I think a strongly worded memo is in order…

  • http://twitter.com/ktumulty Karen Tumulty

    The whole point of this would be to change the “culture of the Senate” that is talked about in that link. Senators like to work banker’s hours and go off to their fundraisers in the evening. To actually force a filibuster would require a massive exercise of discipline by the majority, making their members stay on the floor. It can be done, and has, as recently as 1988:
    .
    http://www.pbs.org/newshour/campaign/issues/1988_retro.html

  • shepherdwong

    What do you think of the article explaining the “why” over at TPM:

    And majority leaders typically wouldn’t even want members of the minority to filibuster, [Senate Historian Donald A.] Ritchie explained. Why give them that platform?
    .
    “Senators like to talk, actually,” Ritchie said. “And it’s not really a punishment to make them talk. Especially with television in the chamber.”
    .
    Plus, Ritchie said, several majority leaders believed that these “all-night talk-a-thons weren’t doing anybody any good.” They not only wore down the minority, but the majority too. And they had the potential to dominate an already crowded Senate calendar.
    .
    Filibusters aren’t exactly difficult to keep rolling, either. As Ryan Grim pointed out last year, Majority Leader Harry Reid’s office has studied the issue and concluded that a filibustering senator “can be forced to sit on the [Senate] floor to keep us from voting on that legislation for a finite period of time according to existing rules but he/she can’t be forced to keep talking for an indefinite period of time.” And only one Republican at a time would have to monitor the Senate floor. The rest, it seems, could all go on vacation while a lone member of the minority sat there “filibustering” quietly.

    http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2010/01/filibuster-20-how-41-senators-control-the-country-without-actually-filibustering.php?ref=fpblg

  • http://twitter.com/ktumulty Karen Tumulty

    Shepherd: See my reply to the comment above this one. It can be done. It requires changing the culture of the Senate, and an exercise of will by the majority, who would have to stay on the floor.

  • shepherdwong

    No one is making the argument that they can’t do it, just why they won’t. And your comment seems like yet another reason why they don’t want to.

  • bobcn1

    The thought of having McConnell or DeMint chased and arrested by the sergeant-at-arms makes the idea seem almost worthwhile (or at least entertaining). However, the final sentence in the article you’ve cited gives me pause.

  • Matt

    Rendell ignores the fact that whatever the Dems gain from public backlash over a GOP filibuster will be lost in the media’s non-stop coverage of the legislative defeat that would mean.

    http://www.political-buzz.com/

  • http://twitter.com/ktumulty Karen Tumulty

    Shepherd: Yes, that’s my point, and has been since I started making this argument. The problem is not the process, it’s the attitude.

  • destor23

    Hee hee about “The Little Girls Of the United States Senate” but, even funnier… the women in the Senate seem to be in better shape and likely have a lot more stamina than the pudgy old white men.

  • gysgt213

    KT-It also has the potential to change public preception of the filibuster too. If these Senators are forced on the floor issue after issue.

  • shepherdwong

    And, as usual, Democrats start the game 10-points behind by being held accountable for solving a problem that’s created by Republicans.

  • stuartzechman

    Everybody I can think of understands your position perfectly, KT.

  • stuartzechman

    Great reporting, KT. Thanks for keeping on this.

  • http://fourlegsrgood.wordpress.com fourlegsgood

    I’m with you. Make them stand up on the floor and tell us why they think health care shouldn’t be reformed. If nothing else it will put their obstructionism on display.

  • stuartzechman

    “Little Girls” or “House of Lords”?

  • bobcn1

    Shining a light on what’s going on could certainly be a good thing. The media and much of the public seem to accept the idea that 60 votes to get anything done is normal. It’s not.
    .
    Whether the democrats could effectively make their case is another question, though. The dems are just not very good at PR and politics.
    .
    Also, calling senators ‘Little Girls’ is an awfully mean thing to say. You owe little girls an apology.

  • ilikechips

    KT-gotta love your liberal bias/ When is Obama gonna be on the cover again? hook em horns( I mean Stephanopolous)

  • apollyon07

    ^ reminds me of the U.N.

  • apollyon07

    It might as well be the House of Lords due to the re-election rates (you can thank voter apathy and McCain-Feingold for that)

  • apr2563

    No matter what Obama or the House does, the bulls of the Senate’s first reaction is to protect their own fiefdoms. His spending freeze will be met with snorts of protest. They will want to protect agriculture subsidies, subsidies to oil and gas, and all of the other spending that benefits their states and their K Street contributions. This is true of Reps and Dems.

  • apr2563

    During the health care debate Reps did make their speechs, had their graphs and stated their oppositon to HCR. That their arguments were specious and belied what CBO was reporting, they continued to make their points. Of course, they offered nothing positive in response except tort reform and interstate availability of ins. Tort reform might save 1 1/2% of total health care costs. In states that have instituted tort reform premiums have not gone down. Innerstate insurance availibility would mean insurance cos. could sell ins from states that had the weakest regulation.
    The Reps, as a whole, were even against making the ins. cos. adhere to anti-trust laws.

  • apr2563

    If the Dems do drink some Balls Beer and insist on a real filibuster, I hope the traditional media will not mock the sight of cots and imply how weak the Dems are that they had to allow a filibuster.

  • hotbbq

    At this point I would rather have a filibuster than not. If the bill goes up in flames because nary a single Republican votes yes, then so be it. Will the Democrats look like failures? Definitely. Will the Republicans pick up multiple seats this year? Probably. Will the public finally get to see how completely bankrupt our legislative process is? Absolutely. In the end it won’t make much difference, though. Between the ineptitude of Democrats and the sheer evil that is the Republican agenda, this country will never pass a meaningful, budget neutral, and effective universal health care bill. It just isn’t going to happen. Not with these parties in power and not with this legislative body.

  • allthingsinaname

    It takes leadership, something that is lacking in the Democratic Party.
    .
    Our President is flopping around like a fish out of water, while Congress is heading for cover. It is embarassing to watch.
    .
    We could have voted for McCain and Palin and had a better time, at least it would have been something we expected.

  • textee

    Karen Tumulty: “We’ll see if the Little Girls of the United States Senate ….”

    Ms. Tumulty:

    Little girls are sweet, kind and pleasant. I don’t know of any elected Democrat in the United States Senate, or anywhere else, who is sweet, kind or pleasant.

  • kevin

    KT and others:
    .
    Here’s an eye-popping graph that shows just how recently the abuse of the filibuster (or threat thereof) has become an epidemic:
    .
    http://www.balloon-juice.com/?p=33367

  • kathy

    KT This cartoon is what I think of whenever the Democrats faint at the thought of provoking a filibuster.

    (Who’s “fault” is this? Is it fundamentally Reid who’s weak-kneed?)

  • primor1

    Had not seen the author of the post but upon reading “Little Girls” I looked up. Must say that I was surprised to find a woman using the term in this manner. Is there no other way to say that they lack cojones?

  • Exiled_At_Home (formerly Neo)

    Pffft…

  • http://shorthorse.wordpress.com shorthorse

    It does seem odd that just 60 senators can completely ignore the obvious and loudly stated will of the majority of the American public push through the ruination of the American health care system.

  • http://swampland.blogs.time.com/2010/01/29/doris-kearns-goodwin-let-them-filibuster/ Doris Kearns Goodwin: “Let Them Filibuster.” – Swampland – TIME.com

    [...] It's been quite a week for my Make Them Filibuster campaign. Two high-profile endorsements! First, Governor Ed Rendell and now historian Doris Kearns [...]

  • http://swampland.blogs.time.com/2010/02/04/joe-klein-welcome-to-let-them-filibuster/ Joe Klein: Welcome to Let Them Filibuster – Swampland – TIME.com

    [...] a Comment • Trackback (0) Welcome, Joe. We've been here for a while. But you can now join Ed Rendell and Doris Kearns Goodwin. And, oh, yeah, … me. It started all the way back [...]

blog comments powered by Disqus