And here you thought all nighters were only for college students? NOT QUITE.
And here you thought due to 2006 that Republicans absolutely HATED the filibuster and demanded “up and down” votes as the only real manifestation of Democracy, not the old 19th and 20th century filibusters that (they argued last year) reflected a legislative mechanism so terribly out of date and undemocratic. NOT QUITE.
And here you thought due to 2006 that Democrats virtually embraced device of the filibuster, rather than just respecting it. NOT QUITE..
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, in an effort to make Republicans put their political capital where their verbal displays of loyalty to the Bush administration is, has threatened to in essence call politically skittish Republicans’ bluff on continuing to visibly back President George Bush on the war — so he’s forcing the issue. Bob Geiger:
Forcing his Republican colleagues to put up or shut up on the notion of an up-or-down vote, Senate Majority leader Harry Reid (D-NV) just moments ago announced that he will immediately file a cloture motion on the Reed-Levin troop redeployment bill and, if Republicans follow through with a filibuster, will place the Senate in a prolonged all-night session Tuesday to force a true continuation of debate.
“Now, Republicans are using a filibuster to block us from even voting on an amendment that could bring the war to a responsible end,” said Reid. “They are protecting the President rather than protecting our troops. They are denying us an up or down – yes or no – vote on the most important issue our country faces.”
Note that Reid is pointedly using the same phrase that Republicans and Republican talk show hosts used last year when they opposed the filibuster. MORE:
The Reed-Levin amendment to the Department of Defense (DoD) Authorization Bill requires George W. Bush to “commence the reduction of the number of United States forces in Iraq not later than 120 days after the date of the enactment of this Act” and mandates a withdrawal of most combat forces by April 30, 2008.
The legislation, S.AMDT.2087, has bipartisan support and is cosponsored by Gordon Smith (R-OR), Chuck Hagel (R-NE) and Olympia Snowe (R-ME).
Reid will be using the provision of Rule 22 that allows for up to 30 hours of continuous debate once it’s made clear — in this case, by Republicans trying to avoid an up-or-down vote on Reed-Levin — that there is a desire to continue debating the issue…..
“I would like to inform the Republican leadership and all my colleagues that we have no intention of backing down,” said Reid this afternoon. “If Republicans do not allow a vote on Levin/Reed today or tomorrow, we will work straight through the night on Tuesday. The American people deserve an open and honest debate on this war, and they deserve an up or down vote on this amendment to end it.”
The rare, round-the-clock session Tuesday night through Wednesday morning is intended to bait Republicans into an exhaustive debate on the politically unpopular war, as well as punish GOP members for routinely blocking anti-war legislation.
“How many sleepless nights have our soldiers and their families had?†said Democratic Whip Dick Durbin, D-Ill.
Democrats are trying to ratchet up pressure on Republicans who have grown uneasy with the lack of progress and begun questioning President Bush’s military strategy.
Republicans shrugged off the planned marathon debate as political theater. Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., said Republicans “welcome further debate†but that there was no reason why the Senate couldn’t vote sooner.
The political sparring came as several Republican congressional staffers met privately with Bush aides in the West Wing of the White House to hash out an effective communications strategy on the war.
According to one member who attended, President Bush made a brief surprise visit and thanked the staffers — spokespeople for Republican leadership on Capitol Hill — for sticking behind him. Bush told the staffers he would not rethink his Iraq policies until a critical military assessment comes in September.
And there is the problem:
Bush has been saying “wait until September.” But there is an uneasy feeling in some quarters that no matter what the data says, the spin machine will be out in full blast — or there will be an announcement that more troops will be needed to make a surge that (under this theory) will be said is working succeed.
A news report suggests that this is a distinct possibility:
The U.S. military is weighing new directions in Iraq, including an even bigger troop buildup if President Bush thinks his “surge” strategy needs a further boost, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff said Monday.
Marine Gen. Peter Pace revealed that he and the chiefs of the Army, Marine Corps, Navy and Air Force are developing their own assessment of the situation in Iraq, to be presented to Bush in September. That will be separate from the highly anticipated report to Congress that month by Gen. David Petraeus, the top commander for Iraq.
The Joint Chiefs are considering a range of actions, including another troop buildup, Pace said without making any predictions. He called it prudent planning to enable the services to be ready for Bush’s decision.
The military must “be prepared for whatever it’s going to look like two months from now,” Pace said in an interview with two reporters traveling with him to Iraq from Washington.
“That way, if we need to plus up or come down” in numbers of troops in Iraq, the details will have been studied, he said.
Pace, on his first visit since U.S. commanders accelerated combat operations in mid-June, said another option under consideration is maintaining current troop levels beyond September.
CAUTIONARY NOTE: This is, of course, contingency planning. But the prospect is indeed out there and the administration shows no signs that it intends to adjust policy to take into account opinion polls, the U.S. Congress or sentiment within the Democratic or Republican parties.
But how bad has it gotten for the Republicans? So bad that a rock-ribbed Republican newspaper has now broken with the administration:
The Pittsburgh newspaper owned by conservative billionaire Richard Mellon Scaife yesterday called the Bush administration’s plans to stay the course in Iraq a “prescription for American suicide.”
The editorial in the Tribune-Review added, “And quite frankly, during last Thursday’s news conference, when George Bush started blathering about ‘sometimes the decisions you make and the consequences don’t enable you to be loved,’ we had to question his mental stability.”
It continued: “President Bush warns that U.S. withdrawal would risk ‘mass killings on a horrific scale.’ What do we have today, sir?
“If the president won’t do the right thing and end this war, the people must. The House has voted to withdraw combat troops from Iraq by April. The Senate must follow suit….
“Our brave troops should take great pride that they rid Iraq of Saddam Hussein. And they should have no shame in leaving Iraq. For it will not be, in any way, an exercise in tail-tucking and running.
Meanwhile, the Los Angeles Times reports, Republicans are getting very concerned over the rumblings from their constituents which suggest many of them may have to get out their job resumes after election day if current sentiment grows — or even holds:
The 2008 campaign season is starting to take shape for congressional candidates, and many Republicans see warning signs that the steepest price for the White House’s Iraq policy may be paid not by President Bush, who will not be on the ballot, but by the GOP lawmakers who will be.
In New Hampshire, a recent poll found Republican Sen. John E. Sununu trailing one possible Democratic challenger by a double-digit margin.
In Minnesota, Sen. Norm Coleman raised about $300,000 less in the second quarter than his best-known Democratic challenger, comedian Al Franken.
In Oregon, approval ratings for Sen. Gordon H. Smith did not improve after he switched positions and called for a U.S. troop withdrawal.
Republicans say they hope passion about the Iraq war will cool by the time 2008 ballots are cast. But they acknowledge that if the election were held tomorrow, the war would be a ball and chain around the GOP ankle.
The LAT also notes the peril facing GOPers in the current tussle with Reid:
This week brings another telling vote, as the Senate considers an amendment by Sens. Carl Levin (D-Mich.) and Jack Reed (D-R.I.) that would force Bush’s hand and set a firm deadline for a troop withdrawal.
The fact that so few Republicans have been willing to embrace that firm deadline means they will continue to be exposed to criticism from Democrats and from constituents weary of the war. Some Republican strategists worry that no matter what lawmakers do now, the issue will leave some Republican incumbents vulnerable.
“There will be races that will be more competitive in places you don’t expect,” said a senior advisor to one Republican facing a tough reelection contest. “Fifteen months is a lifetime in politics, it’s true. But questions like this war don’t go away quickly. This has been three years coming. I don’t think it goes away in a New York minute.”
And therein lies either the political genius or the political evil of Reid (choose one according to your bias):
If the Republicans do insist on a filibuster and there is an all nighter, it’s unlikely the GOP is going to come out ahead, no matter what the White House and conservative talk radio spin is. The people the White House and Republicans now need to reach are ….the voters that have been lost not the remaining, loyal Republicans they now have.
An all night session will be a field day for television news, cable news and newspapers. (Many weblogs will run respective clips of the side that supports their position and explain it accordingly).
The fact is: an all night session with Republicans arguing stay the course — even just stay the course a bit more until September — will CONTINUE to solidify the image of a party that is backing and enabling a President who has made it clear that polls, the Congress, sentiment in both political parties, some sentiment in the military, and the views and advice of some key former members of the Bush 41 administration don’t matter.
In college all nighters, students cram for exams.
No matter how its spun, in terms of imagery, this all nighter could end up with Republicans getting crammed on election day.
BUT THAT’S JUST OUR VIEW. HERE IS A CROSS SECTION OF A FEW OTHERS:
—Kevin Drum:
..I’m not quite sure what’s going on here. Reid isn’t forcing Republicans to engage in a genuine filibuster. In fact, it’s Democrats who are going to be doing the talking. And when it’s all over on Wednesday, he’ll hold a vote and…..what? Probably he’ll get about 55 votes for Reed-Levin and the amendment will fail. So there’s some political theater here, which might or might not work, but as far as I can tell Reid isn’t forcing a filibuster.
Back when the Republicans controlled the Congress, the filibuster used to be this outmoded thing, deserving only to be nuked if ever invoked by the Democrats. But now that the tables have turned, the GOP has taken to using this procedural option with gusto.
Yep. Harry toed the line. It has the left in a positively giddy mood. And it will not impress the voters, other than the true believers, one whit. It is a stunt, and a lame one. It actually works against the Democratic party attempts to paint this as “Bush’s war” and puts them firmly on the side of “Democratic party surrenders to the terrorists.” Thank heavens Harry’s not smart enough to see that. That is the perfect way to paint the Democrats as the party of defeat and retreat – and he walked right into it. Nice shoes, Harry.
—My DD’s Jonthan Singer sees a danger for Democrats:
During the last Congress, Senate Republicans found themselves to be frustrated by Democrats’ moves to stall the judicial nominations of some extremely conservative jurists. As a result, they decided to hold a 30-hour counter filibuster, forcing Democrats to the floor overnight as they talked through the evening about the importance of radically realigning the court to favor corporations, an all-powerful executive and the religious right. By undertaking this action, Senate Republicans hoped to expose what they saw as Democratic obstructionism. Yet in the end, it was the Republicans who emerged with egg on their faces, seemingly wasting taxpayer dollars and legislators’ time in a clearly futile effort.
I do not believe that there is a direct parallel here….Yet at the same time, just as the Republicans’ dog and pony show during the last Congress did wonders to highlight the Democrats’ attack that the 109th Congress was a “Do Nothing Congress”, so too might an all-night talk-a-thon remind voters of the fact that despite the fact that the Democrats have been able to move legislation out of the House and even at times out of the Senate that a good deal of of the top priorities of Congressional leadership have not been signed into law.
Oh my goodness. The Senate is actually going to be in session for a few hours of overtime. This is supposed to impress the American people?….So Harry Reid has to stay up past his bedtime one night. Big deal. Troops over in Iraq are putting in 12- to 16-hour days fighting in a war that Reid and half the Democrats in the Senate authorized. I remember all the get-the-WMD talk and all the flag-waving shown by the Republicans and half the Democrats — a month before an election.
Now the war is not so popular and Reid and Hillary Clinton and John Kerry and all those other sunshine patriots are on their high horse telling me how immoral the war is. I’ll tell you what is immoral: Starting a war, putting our soldiers in harm’s way and then bitching about the cost 4 years later.
Good for Harry Reid for drawing a line in the proverbial sand, on the Senate floor. It’s been a long time since the Senate has seen a good old fashioned filibuster. The American public might learn a thing or two if we do.
Even if Reid’s move amounts to a pointless stunt it has already put the GOP’s filibuster tic at the top of the news, which is where Republicans don’t want it. Reading the phone book for a day and a half won’t hold up the Senate any worse than Republicans already have done. The only difference is that now we can see whether they will still do it with the country watching…
As I now understand it Rule 22 doesn’t have all that much to do with an actual filibuster – Democrats will do all the talking while Republicans just sort of sit around and watch. I get the point; if you want to debate, let’s debate. Still, the optics of this don’t really work for me. To most people this could easily look like the Democrats forcing Republicans to sit around and be lectured to, sort-of in retaliation for Republicans invoking a filibuster….Unlike a filibuster, here Joe consumer will see Democrats up front and, honestly, it won’t be that much of a stretch for him to think that maybe some of this Congressional logjam is the Dems’ fault.
–Truthdig:
Fox News showed its lack of bias with this headline on what appears to be a straight news story: “Reid Threatens to Keep Senate Up All Night, Republicans Yawn.†Fox also quotes an unnamed “senior Democratic aide†as saying: “Is this a publicity stunt? Yes. This is the only way we know to highlight their complete ignorance of the will of the people!â€
For more weblog reaction visit memeorandum.
Joe Gandelman is a former fulltime journalist who freelanced in India, Spain, Bangladesh and Cypress writing for publications such as the Christian Science Monitor and Newsweek. He also did radio reports from Madrid for NPR’s All Things Considered. He has worked on two U.S. newspapers and quit the news biz in 1990 to go into entertainment. He also has written for The Week and several online publications, did a column for Cagle Cartoons Syndicate and has appeared on CNN.