Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Progressive House Members: The Senate Sucks

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
babylonsister Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-25-10 05:10 PM
Original message
Progressive House Members: The Senate Sucks
http://videocafe.crooksandliars.com/node/38589


The Senate Sucks
By scarce Sunday Jul 25, 2010 1:00pm
Video at link~



Sam Stein at Huffington Post captured these surprisingly frank assessments yesterday of the (dysfunctional) U.S. Senate from three progressive congressmen. Tom Perriello of Virginia (speaking via Skype) was especially blunt.

The entire exchange (about 10 minutes) is well worth watching as well. Here's the recorded video of the panel.

I've added some video to further capture the moment.

A trio of progressive House members took direct aim at their colleagues in the Senate on Saturday, declaring that the upper chamber "sucks," has a "toxic effect" on the legislative process, and would cost House Democrats seats in the 2010 election.

...

"They say the senate has a luxury of time, six-year cycles for elections," said Rep. Raul Grijalva (D-Ariz.), co-chair of the House Progressive Caucus. "But these last 18 months have, in memory, have not only been the most frustrating but the inertia created in the Senate is what is jeopardizing Democrats and progressives' opportunities in the midterms. It is not our lack of action. It has been their lack of action."

"I think {we} feel a frustration because my constituents don't necessarily distinguish between the House and the Senate," said Rep. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.). "And so when they see something not getting done they are not really tolerant of my argument which is, 'Well it passed the House.' That doesn't really wash. They hold us all accountable for the failure of these issues moving forward. I personally think the 60-vote requirement in the United States Senate is a bastardization of the United States constitution."

"It sucks," said Rep. Tom Perriello (D-Va.), "and I mean it literally. It sucks the energy out of the room and it sucks the urgency out of what we do... The lack of urgency from the Senate on these jobs bill is soul-crushing."


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
hobbit709 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-25-10 05:14 PM
Response to Original message
1. I agree with that 1000%
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Recursion Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-25-10 05:18 PM
Response to Original message
2. The Senate explicitly was created for two related purposes
1) to over-represent rural interests
2) to delay legislation

This isn't cynicism; this is explicitly stated in the Federalist papers. It's why the Senate was created.

Lest we forget, if it weren't for this delaying capacity in the Senate, if a Senate minority couldn't completely derail legislation by keeping sufficient discipline, W would have gotten his social security privatization scheme through in '05.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Curmudgeoness Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-25-10 05:30 PM
Response to Reply #2
6. Third purpose---to keep the commoners (House) from having much power. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Radical Activist Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-25-10 05:23 PM
Response to Original message
3. The Senate is threatening the Democratic majority and Obama's Presidency.
I don't know how many things they have to water down or destroy before progressives start to focus their efforts on getting more progressives in the Senate.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
PassingFair Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-25-10 05:32 PM
Response to Reply #3
7. Didn't we just TRY THAT in Nebraska?
The White House objected.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Radical Activist Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-25-10 05:42 PM
Response to Reply #7
9. What does that mean?
You give up on something just because the White House objects?

I don't know what you're referring to in Nebraska.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
PassingFair Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-25-10 08:48 PM
Response to Reply #9
11. Sorry, I meant Arkansas.
Blanche Lincoln
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Warpy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-25-10 05:25 PM
Response to Original message
4. No kidding, the Senate is in desperate need of a cleaning out
and a frequent cleaning out, at that. There is no way it should ever be a gerontocracy full of ancient coots who get in every term because the constituents recognize their names and no other reason, then sit on their fat asses and refuse to do their damn jobs..

The terms should be shortened to four years, with elections happening half and half, every two years.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TheWraith Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-25-10 05:29 PM
Response to Original message
5. Yep. No surprises here.
The Senate is a bottleneck where 41 people representing just 34% of the US population can stop any and all business.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
IndianaJoe Donating Member (664 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-25-10 05:37 PM
Response to Original message
8. If you ask me, that's sugar-coating it. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
femrap Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-25-10 06:16 PM
Response to Original message
10. soul-crushing....
quite apt.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Wed May 08th 2024, 07:29 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC