Reid screws up. Ethics reform in the Senate suffers. Dems outfoxed.

[TayTay]

This is outrageous. What the hell was Harry Reid thinking? What a moronic turn of events.

Okay, what am I talking about? Yesterday, Sen. DeMint added a 2nd degree Amendment to an Amendment that Sen. Reid had to the Senate Ethics Reform bill. (S.1. Still with me?) DeMint took the language that Rep Nancy Pelosi used in the House version of Ethics Reform that defined how and when earmarks could be used to designate specific government funding to specific projects across the country. (Think of that famous Bridge to Nowhere in Alaska. That was an earmark.)

Reid has a much weaker version of earmark reform in mind. His version would really only affect about 5% of earmark projects and they most likely could be put back into bills anyway at a later point in the legislative process. This was earmark reform without the, ah, actual reform. It would sound like the Senate was doing something, when in reality, they weren't.

DeMint called their bluff. (BTW, I can't stand Jim DeMint. He is a hard-core Rethug true-believer. But he nailed the Dems yesterday, just nailed them.) He put an amendment forward that contained Nancy Pelosi's language from the House Ethics Reform bill. This would affect 100% of earmark projects and make people own up to their requests for funding for pet projects. The Democrats did NOT recognize the language and Sen. Durbin of Illinois took to the floor to denounce this amendment as ill-thought out and unwise. Sigh!

DeMint, sensing a political 'moment' in time, took to the floor and revealed that this was Pelosi's language and that he was there to applaud her for taking this tough stand and to signal his intention to work with Democrats by voting FOR a Democratic reform. (He had the Democrats dead to rights at that moment for hypocrisy. Sigh!) Reid does NOT want this amendment to pass. He called for a vote to 'Table' or kill the DeMint amendment outright.

The vote failed. The following Dems voted AGAINST killing the amendment: Cantwell, Feingold, Harkin, Kerry, Landrieu, Nelson (FL), Obama, Tester and Independent Lieberman. (OMG, a king of pork voted against tabling this. Lieberman voted not to table. OMFG!)

Normally, after a vote like this, the Senator proposing the amendment moves for a voice vote and the amendment is approved and put into the bill. (Hey, they just voted FOR it in voting not to kill it. Senate logic is tough, but that much is clear, right?) Reid was pissed, so he had Sen. Durbin object to the voice vote. The Amendment is now pending in the Senate while Reid tries to get Senators like Obama, Kerry and Feingold to change their minds and back the meaningless Reid Amendment that represents toothless ethics reform.

The Rethugs get a big damn club to beat the Democrats over the head. The Democrats get egg on their face, an increase in the cynicism as it is apparent that they only back theoretical reform and a big black eye for Harry Reid who can't control his Senators. (Holding the vote open, which is what Reid is essentially doing in order to hunt up Dem votes to kill it, is something Tom Delay excelled at in the House. Sigh! Dems should not be in the position of looking like Tom Delay in terms of ethics and how they run their Congress.)

Anyway, this unnecessary food fight is brought to you by that crack Democratic Leadership team that everyone was so proud of last month. (When they were dissing Kerry and other Dems and calling them irrelevant.) This is a big stupid screwup. (Nice going Harry. :sarcasm:)

Read me: http://tinyurl.com/y5jae3


This is going to be in every damn Republican news release going forward. I am so pissed about this. Nice going Harry.

[Luftmensch067]

1. I'd missed this

And I'm quite sure I wouldn't have understood one whit of what was going on if I'd seen it! Thank you for explaining it so cogently, Tay -- and with choice commentary (that's the best part! :-))

Harry Reid is a menace (note current issue of Vanity Fair, which calls him the Major-Domo or something asinine like that! Man, is the MSM out of the loop, or what??!)

[MBS]

2. horrible

but sadly not surprising..totally with you on that last paragraph , right down to the "sarcasm" smilie.
Reid drives me NUTS.

[MBS]

3. ps that was a great great post, Tay

Really superb :toast:

[Noisy Democrat]

10. I used to like him

until it became clear he was stepping on JK. *sigh*

[blm]

4. Didn't see this in GD-P. Great post, Tay

.

[TayTay]

5. It's in GD and sinking fast. n/t

[wisteria]

7. That's because it doesn't have, Obama, Kerry, Edwards or Clinton in the subject title.

I will go and give it a little push up.

[karynnj]

11. If it's not too late, change the title

to refer to the Kerry/Feingold fight with Reid.

[TayTay]

12. No. This is not about Kerry, it's about Reid

There is no reason to promote Kerry. There is every reason to be mad at Reid for both trying to water down reform and for being a bone-headed politician.

Let this unfold. Sen. Kerry has backed every good piece of reform in this bill. Let's get to the end of it and tally up which Dems were for real reform and which were not. That will be a Kerry post.

[karynnj]

29. Good point - I was responding to your comment that it was not

staying high on DU main forum But, I see your point and we are always accsed of that and here the issue is that Reid is wrong

[TayTay]

30. Thanks. It's about Reid right now and his screwup

But, the way things are going, it will be about Kerry and a handful of other Dems actually upholding real reform by the end of the day. That would make a great post for DU (GD and GD - P)

[wisteria]

6. I say, let it pass! Kerry and the others would be wrong to change their votes.

It would make them look unethical. This is what Reid gets for trying to pull a fast one on the public. Trying to push through phony reforms and then claim we are more ethical than the Repubs. I sense this story is going to be picked up by the RW talking heads.

Note, I fear this is the type of games we are going to see coming out of our new Congress and coming from the Dem's. I mention this because I read this morning that the Democrats are considering a symbolic vote against Bush plans for Iraq. Symbolic?

[karynnj]

13. I would be extremely disappointed if Kerry changed his vote

though I seriously doubt he will - he voted against the anemic lobbying bill last year calling it a sham.

[TayTay]

15. Wait this out.

The Dems might yet strengthen the bill. They are now deep into the weeds on it, going into the utter darkness of "the 2nd degree amendment to the underlying amendment to the amendment to the bill." (Here there be dragons, in other words.)

This is messy stuff now. Let it play out before you bring up specific names. The Dems have their ahm, nuts, ahm, caught in the ahm, ringer on this one. Well, some Dems do and some do not. We do not know what will pass eventually on this.

Wait this out. Do not trumpet it yet. Seriously, I caution you from bringing up anyone's name as being for or against, except for the Reid screwup. (We don't know how this will play out yet, what with all the amendments and the need to save face on the part of Reid/Durbin.)

[mloutre]

18. Screw the need for Reid/ Durbin to save face.

Because they've already lost face just by signing off on this.

WTF is this, anyway? Reid was for earmark reform until he was against it? This is bogus on the half shell.

What skeletons does Reid have in his closet and who's got pictures of them threatening to post them in the internets that he should go along with this farce? Is he secretly on the Illuminati's payroll or what?

This is bad. This is bogusoid. This is seriously chingada.

And this is not, repeat *not* what we voted for in November of 2006.

And WTF is Kerry doing on the wrong side of this particular fence anyway? Inquiring otters want to know.

Just say no, John. Just say no.

[TayTay]

19. Kerry is on the side of the Angels on this one

and on the other vote that said that Congress Members should not put relatives on the public payroll.

Sorry if I didn't make that clear. Sen. Kerry is down-the-line FOR the correct and tougher reforms on this. Again, on the side of the angels here otter. (Good man. Glad I voted for him. Someone should celebrate this and name a burger after him or something.)

Ried inserted language into a bill last fall to buy up land in Nevada for some new federal building project. Gee, it just so happened to be near land Harry owned. Gee, the value of that land just went way, way up. By a million or two I hear.

Meet the new boss. Same as the old boss. And I agree, this is not what we voted for in Nov.

[karynnj]

32. Kerry's on the good side

[wisteria]

34. Kerry is on the good side of this matter. n/t

[wisteria]

31. This may actually mean Reid will have to submit a bill with real reforms. n/t

[mloutre]

16. Bring me the head of Harry Reid!

EOM

[wisteria]

35. LOL, he needs to remember who he works for. n/t

[TayTay]

8. It got worse. Reid had the Senate re-assembled just so he

could pitch his version of the earmark bill. A recorded vote was taken in the US Senate to order the Sargeant-at-Arms to compel Senators attendance on the floor. http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=110&session=1&vote=00007

This was so Harry could explain what the earmark bill meant, why the Senate needed to defeat the DeMint Amendment and go with his toothless 'reform' legislation.

Harry Reid had the Senate take a recorded vote to compel the Sargeant-at-Arms to rustle up a quorom just so he could 'save face.' OMFG! What the hell is going on there?

[wisteria]

14. This seems like a huge screw up, and Reid is going to pay for this.

The RW has been after him and red meat against the Dems, they now have it.

[MH1]

17. RW hate radio jocks are grinning from ear to ear.

Those who have heard about it, anyway.

I'm probably jumping the gun, they won't get their talking points delivered til a little later in the day, I think.

But I can just hear Smerconish's voice dripping with glee tomorrow morning. And he's one of the sometimes-sane ones. Sigh.

[wisteria]

20. Oh, Hannity will be on it today and Limbaugh, The other lessors will have it by tomorrow morning. n

[mloutre]

22. Yeah. Way to go. Give 'em help, Harry.

EOM

[mloutre]

21. It's not just Reid. *We* are gonna have to pay for this. Dammit.

EOM

[wisteria]

36. Yes, it prove the REpub case that we are as unethical and corrupt too.

The public won't remember what individual member are or aren't unethical. They will lumb all are member together in one neat little package and the Repubs will be happy to remind them constantly that we are bad apples too.
I think someone has to pay for this and be made an example of, I think this person is Reid. This little action on his part and the damage it will create far out ways the damage created by a trump-ed botched joke.

[babylonsister]

9. Durbin talking about DeMint amendment now (CSPAN-2). nt

[TayTay]

23. What's going on in the Senate right now.

Harry Reid knows he screwed up and is trying to fix it. So, Sen. Durbin proposed a 2nd degree amendment to the DeMint 1st degree amendment to the Reid Amendment to the original Ethics Bill. (Still with me here? ) The 2nd degree amendment seeks to change language in the DeMint 1st degree amendment to make it look like Dems are FOR tough reform, even though yesterday's screwup happened. (Still with me here? Senate procedure is weird.)

The Senate is in a quorum call because Harry is in the Majority Leaders office trying to explain what he wants to the waivering Democrats, probably including Sen. Kerry. He may yet come out with something that approaches honest reform. Sen. Kerry might even vote for it if it meets his ethical standards. We don't know yet. This has to play out. Stay tuned. What we know for certain is that the Democrats (well some Democrats LOL) screwed up badly on their first major piece of legislation of the 110th Congress. Ahm, not good.

Make sense?

[whometense]

24. I honestly don't get this.

Why was Reid against the DeMint amendment? I mean really - not what he says is the reason. Does he (and HRC) consider the requirements too constrictive to their political machinations? Didn't they have any idea how this would look? Or did they just assume JK et al would go along quietly and not raise a big noisy fuss.

You'd think the Iraq resolution last summer would have taught him something different.

[TayTay]

25. Reid is a pork master.

He regularly dips into the pork feeds and feeds deeply. Plus, Sen. Reid is now Majority Leader and wants the power to horse-trade pork with Senators in exchange for support on bills he supports. This DeMint amendment might actually curb some power that Reid was expecting to employ to get his way in the Senate.

[whometense]

26. Ah, thank you.

That explains a lot.

What about Hillary?

[TayTay]

27. Hillary is a DC insider

There is no way in hell she is going to do anything at all that would threaten her status with Reid on Dem Leadership. Reid created a special leadership position for her last fall. I guess this is here way of saying, Thank You Harry.

Plus, it's all about the money. The Clintons were never too particular on ethics stuff. There is a lot of pork that finds it's way to New York and a lot of pork that can be used as leverage for 2008 with other Senators.

Remember this and remember who is on the side of real reform and on the side of actually doing away with any vestiges of corruption. Maybe this helps to explain why Kerry is not so loved up there on Capitol Hill sometimes.

[whometense]

28. I know it's been said a million and a half times,

but there's a big glowing line that separates those who talk about morals from those who live by them. We know which side JK is on, but it's pretty lonely on his side of the line.

[MBS]

33. well said!n/t

[Blaukraut]

37. How is he any better than Tom Daschle?

I can't stand that man! He knows damn well what the voters wanted when they voted in November, and he is clearly acting against the will of the American people right now.

[sandnsea]

40. Well he needs to be spanked

As I understand it, the House earmark bill wasn't all that tough to start with. Earmarks are sometimes a good thing, so that money is required to go to a specific program. I remember when there were federal programs for counseling for children of alcoholics or kids who had sexually abused other kids. Earmarking is to make sure money goes there and some backwards state can't funnel the money off to prisons or something. So I can understand not doing away with earmarks altogether, but I also can't imagine weaker legislation than the House bill. This is really disappointing.

[Democrafty]

38. Saw it yesterday, and was shocked.

For once, the Republicans were playing nice, and Reid totally squandered that. Sigh.

[TayTay]

39. HARRY Backs down. Backs REFORM!!!

Yeah! Read all about it: http://www.tpmmuckraker.com/archives/002331.php

[Inuca]

41. Very interesting....

... I saw a bit of the vote to call people back to the floor, weird as can be, and by the way there some that voted against, I mean they were on the floor to vote but voted against coming back.... I know, I know, it's not supposed to have anything to do with logic, but still... I remember McCain voted against, and a few others... anyways... I also heard a bit of what DeMint had ot say after the vote to table, when he thanked the dems that voted not to table, I did not really understand what was happening, but had to check my temperature once again (I was a bit under the weather yesterday) because I found myself in perfect agreement with DeMint! And in accord with Vitter earlier with his amendment, and even with Stevens arguing that he needs to be allowed to fly private planes to reach remote places in Alaska. Do you guys think I should go and see a doctor, I am getting worried here.... Going back to Reid backing down, I wonder whether this will in any way affect his future as majority leader... Like somebody else mentioned above, I used to like him, but I have cooled down significantly.

[Democrafty]

44. Haha, I felt the same way.

But this goes to show how important it is to follow the issues, and not just assume the absolute worst about the other side (even if the worst frequently turns out to be true). Especially since, when you take this out of the Tom Delay, Duke Cunningham, etc. context, there's no reason it needs to be a partisan issue.

[ProSense]

42. Well this is a classic example why

real reform has never been passed in the Senate. I'm glad Reid came to his senses.

[Democrafty]

43. Sigh of relief! n/t

[beachmom]

45. Thanks for the play by play, Tay. Kerry and the others are real

heroes for going against the leadership and forcing Reid into a bind and doing the right thing. As far as DeMint goes, the minority is always going to be more "ethical" because they have very little power other than maybe the minority leadership and some swing voters. That is why regardless of party, if one party has too much power for too long, they become corrupt.

I liked this quote from the TPM link:

Friday morning, a chastened Reid said, “Yesterday was a rather difficult day, as some days are. We tend to get in a hurry around here sometimes when we shouldn’t be. Personally, for the majority, we probably could have done a little better job.”



A little better job?

So, how is right wing radio going to praise those who voted to keep DeMints amendment in, when one of those Democrats was John Kerry?