Sirotablog
David Sirota is a political journalist and nationally syndicated newspaper columnist at Creators Syndicate. David writes about political corruption, globalization and working-class economic issues often ignored by both of America's political parties.
-
October 17, 2007 12:14 PM
Dems Fume About the Tyranny of the Tiny Minority
The Hill Newspaper has an interesting story today about how House Democrats, led by Speaker Nancy Pelosi, are fuming over the U.S. Senate's tyranny of the tiny minority - the situation which I mathematically detailed a few weeks ago whereby a tiny segment of the population has the Senate representation to stop anything. The Hill says there is "a deepening frustration among House Democrats, who are irritated with lack of progress in the Senate and are starting to publicly press their Senate counterparts to stop letting Republicans use procedural tactics and instead force Republicans to carry out a filibuster, if that’s what it takes."
I (obviously) agree with that, and have said repeatedly that one of the most important methods to counter this tyranny is for progressives to focus a hell of a lot more time on state legislatures where there is no filibuster and where Democrats have, in many cases, more power to pass things. That is apostasy to some in Washington, but it is a mathematical necessity, as the Hill article and the raw numbers so clearly elucidate.
Beyond that, though, you will notice that the House Democrats have not said that Senate Democrats could use the filibuster for the progressive agenda. For instance, Senate Democrats could filibuster any Iraq war spending bill that is a blank check with no provisions to end the war. Remember the whole "nuclear option" terminology in the Senate? That derived from the fact that the filibuster is a sort of mutually assured destruction - that is, both sides can use it if they want. One of the big problems is that only one side seems genuinely interested in using it.
Another huge problem is that Senate Democrats have empowered people like Montana Sen. Max Baucus (D) to chair panels like the Finance Committee - the most powerful panel in the Congress, which oversees tax, trade and health care policies. The story explains why that is a problem:
"Looking ahead, Democrats in the lower chamber see more unpalatable compromises on issues like tax policy, where they are disappointed to see their goals in the hands of cautious centrist Sen. Max Baucus (D-Mont.). House Democrats say on tax issues, they are constantly told that nothing can get off the ground unless nine or 10 Republican senators will agree to it. 'Everybody says, ‘What can we get in the Senate?’' explains Rep. Jim McDermott (D-Wash.). 'So we have to go over to Max Baucus with hat in hand.'"
Again, Senate Democrats have made a deliberate decision to put Baucus in that position. Sure, he has seniority, but it is the collective decision of the Senate Democratic Caucus to put him in that position. You may recall a few years back that House Republicans installed Rep. Bill Thomas (R-CA) as chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee over the more senior Rep. Phil Crane (R-IL). Democrats could do the same - but they refuse for many reasons, not the least of which is that Baucus and his behavior helps the party raise huge amounts of corporate cash.
So I give Pelosi and House Democrats credit for raising the issues surrounding the tyranny of the tiny minority. I hope it puts pressure on Senate Democrats to get serious, especially considering a new poll out showing that the Democratic Congress's approval ratings continue to plummet. But just remember, there are powerful forces in Permanent Washington that want to preserve the gridlock and that love the tyranny of the tiny minority. Some of these forces are right within the Democratic Party itself, as I will show in my next nationally syndicated newspaper column, out this Friday. Stay tuned.

Discussion
Bacchus isn't a "centrist". He's way right of center, especially when dealing with important issues like the "war" and "free" trade agreements. He's right in line with K-street and the other Republi-lites and Republicans.
The Democratic "leadership" is far too influenced by K-street, and self-interests to ever not appoint the likes of Max and his ilk to important posts.
They then blame the "minority" for their self-caused problems.
The truth is that if they had stood up and acted like Democrats should, and supported the American people instead of multi-national corporations there would be no "tyranny" because they would have a clear cut majority in both Houses of Congress, and we wouldn't have to listen to this crap.
The only way to alleviate this problem is to directly support populist candidates rather than sending money to the DNC/DLC, which will only fund their buddies, and let the voters go hang.
butte,
Exactly. The thing is the Democrats don't USE what they got. Instead, they choose to LOSE it. Like Bill Press and Molly Ivins would say "USE IT OR LOSE IT!"
This is what happens when you choose your leadership or leadershit on the basis of fundrasing and not competence.
You get a drooling bribe taking cadaver like Reid and a rich, hypcritical and near senile female as speaker.
Its also the price we pay when the party base has NO STANDARDS for their representatives. Democrats are seemingly oblivous and passive in the face one ass raping after another. Democrats routinely re-elect crooks and slimebags that that ought to be in prison or shamed out of the public vue.
Right now Democrats are worshipping two of the biggest crooks and power mongers their party has ever spawned: Gore and Hillary.
As far as I'm concerned the democratic party has went insane.
waltc,
You haven't seen the last of the worst of the Democrats. Get a load of this in today's WaPost:
More concessions to Bush by the Senate:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/10/17/AR2007101702438.html
It's bad enough that Big Telecomm fucks its customers with poor service and spying. Here's comes the slippery slope from "some" telecomms getting immunity to all who support spying against the American people ! And yet the Democrats still complain about not getting enough votes, "conservative" Democrats afraid of being labelled "soft", etc ... It pisses me off that selling out sells well on Capitol Hill yet standing up for the people's wishes somehow doesn't !
Join the Discussion