The Green Lantern Theory of Presidential Power

[ProSense]

The Morning Plum: The Green Lantern Theory of Presidential Power

Posted by Greg Sargent

Why couldn’t President Obama get expanded background checks through the Senate, given that the idea is supported by over eight in 10 Americans? The chatter around that question continues this morning, with the New York Times weighing in with a big piece arguing that the failure of the Toomey-Manchin compromise in the Senate is rooted in Obama’s unwillingness to “twist arms.”

The Times piece, which comes a day after Maureen Dowd made a similar argument, traffics heavily in what a lot of folks like to describe as the Green Lantern Theory of Presidential Power. The thesis appears to be that Toomey-Manchin failed because Obama failed to put enough pressure on red state Democratic Senators like Mark Begich, and that this bodes ill for the rest of his presidency....But this thesis suffers from several problems. To begin with, even if every red state Democrat had voted for the measure, it still wouldn’t have passed.

Just look at the roll call for the vote. It failed by 54-46; if Harry Reid had not voted against the measure for procedural reasons, the tally would have been 55-45. Four red state Dems voted against the bill: Begich, Heidi Heitkamp, Mark Pryor and Max Baucus....if Obama had twisted the arms of every one of those Democrats into pretzels — indeed, if he had twisted all of their arms together into one giant tangle and mounted it atop the Capitol — it still wouldn’t have achieved the 60 votes necessary to pass.

What about the gettable Republicans who voted against the bill, such as Dean Heller and Jeff Flake? The Times story has little to say about the role Republicans played in killing the measure, but it’s hard to see how arm twisting from a Democratic president would have won them over. The simple fact, as Steve Benen aptly demonstrated in chart form the other day, is that the proposal failed because virtually every Republican Senator voted against it. The GOP — and the 60 vote Senate – killed Manchin-Toomey. The Times piece doesn’t mention that 60 vote thing, either.

- more -

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/wp/2013/04/23/the-morning-plum-the-green-lantern-theory-of-presidential-power/

The focus should be on filibuster reform and Republican belligerence. Requiring every piece of legislation to get 60 votes is rendering the Senate dysfunctional.

[geek tragedy]

1. Filibuster is a distraction here--it would have been poison pilled by the national conceal and carry

amendment if there were no filibuster.

There's more support for increasing gun violence in the Senate than there is curbing it.

[ProSense]

5. Well,

"Filibuster is a distraction here--it would have been poison pilled by the national conceal and carry amendment if there were no filibuster."

...we'll never know because the amendment was filibustered.

[lonestarnot]

2. Harry had his chance and he fucked it up.

[ProSense]

4. Yup, here's an amendment that failed

with every Democrat and three Republicans voting for it.

Vote Result: Amendment Rejected

<...>

To increase public safety by punishing and deterring firearms trafficking.

YEAs 58
NAYs 42

http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=113&session=1&vote=00099

[lonestarnot]

6. Disgusting.

[loyalsister]

3. I saw Dowd's article discussed on Morning Joe

My response was to blame my senator for her disdain for the "carrot."
The thing that has been lacking during this administration is earmarks. Ending that practice was a huge mistake. Arm twisting only goes so far. A little pork here and there greased the wheels. I am reminded of this when I see the plaque thanking Kit Bond for the funding to upgrade our transit system. It was badly needed, and happened with great strides. Ironically, sen. McCaskill's office sits across the street from the bus station.