To: Karen Lawrence who wrote (732477 ) 3/16/2006 12:16:39 PM From: PROLIFE Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 769670 Democratic muckraking Mar 16, 2006 by Tim Chapman Last week, the Senate lobbying reform measure was intentionally killed by Senate Democrats. This may surprise you, given the decibel level at which Democrats have been attacking the GOP and what they describe as a “culture of corruption.” Indeed, as the Senate began debating the measure, Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) was upbeat. “I have told the distinguished Majority Leader this is no attempt to stall this legislation,” Reid said on the Senate floor. “I have told the Majority Leader that unless there are issues outside of what the two committees did that are within their jurisdiction, we have no intention of offering a myriad of issues we have Members clamoring to offer – issues on the port security deal . . . we are not going to do it on this legislation. We believe this should be for lobbying reform.” So intent on clearing the way for a reform agenda was Reid that he even vowed not to play politics. “Lobbying reform, of all things, should not be twisted into a vehicle exploited by one party to gain electoral advantage,” said the Minority Leader. But that was before Reid knew that GOP leaders in the House of Representatives planned to include a provision regulating 527s in their legislation. This provision was opposed by the Democratic Party’s cash cow Moveon.org. Not wanting to upset their big donors, Democrats decided to fall back on their tried and true block and blame strategy and go back on their word. Senator Chuck Schumer (D-NY), who according to Senate aides acted with Reid’s blessing, made the kamikaze run against the reform bill. The day after Reid promised not to allow extraneous amendments, especially on the ports deal, Schumer did exactly that. Schumer deceived his fellow senators in order to offer his amendment. On the Senate floor, Schumer sought to be recognized by objecting to a pending unanimous consent agreement. Because any senator can object, he was recognized, but only for the purpose of objecting to the pending amendment. Instead of doing that, once he had the floor, Schumer pulled a piece of paper out of his pocket with a completely different amendment written on it – this one concerning the Dubai ports deal – which he proceeded to submit for consideration. This is the amendment that derailed the bill. The next day Senator John McCain (R-AZ) took the Senate floor to decry the tactic. “It is the right of every senator under the rules to propose an amendment. It is not the right of every senator to mislead his colleagues,” said McCain. “To stand up on the floor of this Senate and say you are going to do one thing and then you do another is not only inappropriate . . . it risks a breakdown of the kind of courtesy we have to extend to each other if we are going to function as a body.” But who said Democrats want the Senate to function? Democrats to the rescue Nothing has been going right for Republicans lately. President Bush’s poll numbers are dismal, and the Republican Congress is increasingly nervous about their reelection prospects this fall. Given the situation, you would think Democrats would just sit back and watch it all happen. But then again, that would assume rational political behavior from a party that is prone to emotional temper tantrums and childlike outbursts. This type of behavior was on display this week thanks to Wisconsin Senator and 2008 hopeful Russ Feingold. Feingold introduced a resolution to censure the President over the NSA wiretapping issue. The censure resolution was immediately embraced by the liberal “netroots” and propelled Feingold into the national spotlight. No sooner had Feingold introduced his resolution than Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist (R-TN) decided to give the loony left exactly what they wanted: a vote. According to Republican staff, Frist immediately recognized that Feingold’s resolution was a case of classic overreach. Frist’s decision to take the Senate floor and ask for a vote on the resolution was a “no-brainer.” A vote on Feingold’s resolution would be the House Murtha vote all over again. But this time, still feeling the sting from their previous overreaches, Democrats were not so quick to take the bait. Senator Paul Sarbanes (D-MD) objected twice to Frist’s motion stalling long enough for Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid to scamper down to the Senate floor to prevent the vote. Reid insisted that a “vote of this importance” needs time for debate and said he was “offended” that the Majority Leader would seek to schedule a vote without first consulting him. The confrontation was roundly scored as a win for Frist and an embarrassing situation for Democrats. Despite the fact that the Democratic caucus’s liberal wing has very nice things to say about Feingold’s resolution, it has no cosponsors yet. This fact, combined with Democratic timidity about the censor resolution prompted Feingold to lash out at his fellow Democrats. "I'm amazed at Democrats . . . cowering with this president's numbers so low," Feingold told the Associated Press. Democratic incompetence in the Senate was summed up nicely by an unwitting senator. Senator Debbie Stabenow (D-MI), who is up for re-election this fall, took the Senate floor on Tuesday to blast the Bush Administration for their record on homeland security. Stabenow, in a bright red suit, stood next to an enormous matching red sign that read, “Dangerously Incompetent.” The picture was immediately pulled from CSPAN and blasted all across the conservative blogosphere. The combination of Reid and Schumer’s dishonest behavior, Feingold’s eagerness to censure a President for protecting the country in a time of war and Stabenow’s comical Senate floor photo-op gave Republicans a much needed reprieve from their own troubles. townhall.com