Democrats' aggressive agenda stalls in Senate

[meganmonkey]

Gee, I really hope they get that "strong message of disapproval" passed :whatever:


Democrats' aggressive agenda stalls in Senate
GOP thwarting a range of bills

By Rick Klein, Globe Staff | February 1, 2007

WASHINGTON -- The aggressive agenda that Democrats pushed through with great fanfare in the House has become bogged down in the Senate, where Republicans have used various stalling strategies to thwart Democratic momentum on issues ranging from healthcare and homeland security to a resolution opposing President Bush's troop "surge."

None of the bills approved in the first 100 legislative hours in the House of Representatives last month has passed the Senate. The only one close to passing -- an increase in the minimum wage -- has consumed more than a week of floor time, and Republicans succeeded in attaching a series of small-business tax breaks favored by the White House.

On the Iraq war, Senate Republicans have so far blocked Democrats from offering a resolution that would express Congress' s disapproval with Bush's plan to send more troops to Iraq.

Republican leaders are pressuring GOP senators who have expressed misgivings about the troop escalation to nonetheless vote against a resolution, contending that non binding statements would be motivated by politics and could harm troops' morale.

"It accomplishes no constructive purpose," said Senator David Vitter , a Louisiana Republican who strongly supports the increase in troops. The Democrats' proposals amount to "nonbinding words that don't stop anything in terms of troop movement, troop funding, but that do clearly hurt our morale, turn off our allies, and embolden the enemy."

The Republicans' stalling tactics have frustrated Democratic leaders. Senate majority leader Harry Reid , a Nevada Democrat, has accused the Republicans of prolonging debate on the minimum wage mainly to keep a war resolution off the Senate floor for as long as possible.

Still, Democrats say they will eventually succeed in passing their main priorities, including a strong message of disapproval with the president's war strategy.


more...

http://www.boston.com/news/nation/wa...lls_in_senate/

[DancingBear]

I'll bet he even gets the word "naughty" in there somewhere.

That'll show 'em.

[kitkatrose]

well, when I was one. How is it that whenever the Dems are in the minority, they can NEVER stall Repubs' bills, but whenever the Repubs are the minority, they can stall everything (good or bad) to hell and back? How do they explain that to the party faithful?

Personally, I get a strong whiff of collusion, that they really don't want to stall/defeat the bills, but need to put up a front for the party and for the appearance of a two-party system.

[meganmonkey]

You make a very good point regarding the inability of Dems to 'stall' anything...I think your conclusion is right on the mark.

[Applezotz]

Democrats have picked up the worst parts of Republican ideology,but not their mean-spiritedness.They still act like liberals who want to get along with everybody,but govern like right-wing Nazis.It's a weird dichotomy,and all part of their skewed definition of bipartisanship.That and the fact the right controls the media,and they are deathly afraid of being demonized as a "libural",when they are really a bunch of center-right globalist warmongers.

[andrew]

i also believe then they stopped some of bush's judge nominees.

[kitkatrose]

but Bolton still got in and I don't remember the dems getting any type of concessions in return. Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong on that. Robert and Alito got through, which is a small disaster.

I'm glad that they keep preventing ANWR from being drilled, but they don't seem to be able to get any alternatives in otherwise, well except for the little bit recently that they've done for climate change. Maybe that part will change since they're in the majority.