Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsIt’s not easy being a United States Senator
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/wp/2013/04/19/its-not-easy-being-a-united-states-senator/
Its not easy being a United States Senator
Posted by Greg Sargent on April 19, 2013 at 1:51 pm
Apparently, the explanation of the moment on Capitol Hill for why Toomey-Manchin failed is that Senators didnt think they could hold controversial positions on too many issues at the same time. Embracing gun control, gay rights, and immigration reform is too heavy a lift. This morning, Ezra Klein points us to one unnamed Senator who told the White House he is being pushed too hard:
Guns, gays and immigration its too much. I can be with you on one or two of them, but not all three.
Meanwhile, Senator Joe Manchin, who tried to round up votes for his compromise on background checks, is on the record saying he has heard similar complaints from multiple Senators. So this really does appear to be a real and widespread rationale. Klein comments:
Its rare that the psychodrama of the Senate comes on such full display. But to state the obvious, this isnt just an explanation for a vote. Its a salve for a guilty conscience. This is not the sort of rationalization that would be leaking from the chamber if senators were confident theyd done the right thing. Its a rationalization for people who feel they did the wrong thing, and want to tell themselves its the cost for doing the right thing later, on an even larger scale.
As Klein concludes, this is rooted in a rather low standard for what constitutes political courage. Meanwhile, Steve Benen notes another important point, i.e., that backing Toomey-Manchin shouldnt even have been difficult in the first place: proponents had bipartisan cover; the key provision was written by two conservatives; and the polls were entirely one-sided.
snip//
Meanwhile, on Manchin-Toomey, some of these Republican Senators who voted No really did appear to recognize that supporting it was the right thing to do. Some of them, such as Dean Heller, continue to say we need to improve our background check system, even while justifying the vote against Manchin-Toomey by citing bogus NRA national gun registry talking points that have been widely debunked by fact checkers and even Republicans like John McCain. Jeff Flake also continues to endorse the general policy goal of fixing background checks even after voting No on Manchin-Toomey. So it looks as if Republican Senators will be willing to take a tough vote on a measure that will help the party (immigration reform) but were not willing to take a tough vote on one based on policy merits (Manchin-Toomey).
And so the argument that these Senators have already put themselves at an abundance of risk seems pretty thin.
InfoView thread info, including edit history
TrashPut this thread in your Trash Can (My DU » Trash Can)
BookmarkAdd this thread to your Bookmarks (My DU » Bookmarks)
8 replies, 888 views
ShareGet links to this post and/or share on social media
AlertAlert this post for a rule violation
PowersThere are no powers you can use on this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
ReplyReply to this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
Rec (2)
ReplyReply to this post
8 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
It’s not easy being a United States Senator (Original Post)
babylonsister
Apr 2013
OP
Scuba
(53,475 posts)1. OFFS
GitRDun
(1,846 posts)2. What a bunch of cowards!
What the heck do they think we send them there for?
Always when I think I've seen the low point, Congress finds a way to take it lower....unbelievable!
Laelth
(32,017 posts)3. Interesting analysis. k&r for exposure. n/t
-Laelth
Rex
(65,616 posts)4. So they refuse to represent us?
WHY am I not shocked in the least bit?
Bucky
(53,795 posts)5. Why should they represent you? Do you pay them?
No, they're paid by the lobbyists for most of the work they do.
Rex
(65,616 posts)6. My taxes help pay their salary.
Alas, you are spot on.
Bucky
(53,795 posts)7. We pay them in the low 6 figures. They pay them in the millions.
ugh, why do I have to be right?
Rex
(65,616 posts)8. Because you understand/comprehend the greed/avarice of the PTB?
I wish you were making stuff up, but that is the honest (and completely sad) truth.