Dan Cody – “Left on the Lake”

I mentioned a few weeks ago how the founding fathers would probably be shocked to find that in American Democracy in 2010 a super majority of 60 votes is needed to advance any legislation in the US Senate.

I doubt they ever meant for this kind of behavior to happen either:

As my colleague Jonathan Chait notes on his blog, Senator Richard Shelby’s decision to put a hold on all Obama nominees, until his state gets several billion dollars in pork barrel spending, really does seem to be a seminal moment in the evolution of Republican obstructionism. Jonathon Cohn, The New Republic

Never mind a super majority, you now need the approval of 100 Senators to get anything done!

Where are the tea party protests about pork barrel spending and the Republican press releases which have been lambasting earmarks since January 2009?

Anyone?

More of this please Mr. President.

And on top of being correct in pointing out that the whole “question” was just a talking point for a campaign, he called it for what it was, BS. That’s the guy we elected.

As a parent, I’m glad the Wisconsin legislature is doing something about Bisphenol A or BPA in baby bottles. I think it’s a good first step to removing the harmful chemical from all our food products, but it seems like a no brainer to remove it from products that are used by the most vulnerable of us.

Bisphenol A would be banned from baby bottles and sipping cups for children age 3 and younger under a bill the Senate unanimously passed Tuesday.

BPA is a chemical used to make hard, clear plastic used in the lining of most food and beverage cans. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration this month said it had concerns about the substance’s effect on the brains, behavior and prostate glands of fetuses, infants and young children.

The Assembly Consumer Protection Committee passed an identical ban Tuesday, making the bill ready for a vote in that house.

Both houses are controlled by Democrats.

Wisconsin would join Canada, Minnesota, Connecticut, Chicago and three counties in New York in banning BPA in baby bottles. The Washington state House passed a ban Monday and that state’s Senate is expected to do the same. – jsonline.com

Busy week.

Corporations and unions now have more power than average people in the outcome of our political elections. Many entrenched Republicans are ecstatic. So are many Democrats.

The U.S. Supreme Court on Thursday rolled back campaign finance restrictions meant to limit corporate and union influence on elections, ruling that these organizations can spend as much as they like to help sway political races. – AP

I’m of the opinion that there is too much special interest and third party money involved already in our political process, and the decision of the Supreme Court today will only make corporate, union and special interest voices more powerful at the expense of the individual citizen and frankly, our democracy. Think about it… A corporation can now have an entire division dedicated to influencing elections.

To those who may disagree, yes, free speech rights are important. But corporations are not people. Corporations can and often are held by foreign interests. Individuals from foreign countries are forbidden from making contributions to political campaigns, but now any corporation can turn on the spigot of money and get their preferred candidate elected for a relatively small amount of money. Why waste money on lobbyists anymore when you can just spend $10 million to purchase a candidate, or trash one in office who may not agree with you?

Oh, and by the way, activist judges!! Where’s the outrage conservatives? Or is your contempt only on display when it’s convenient? Lastly, I wonder what the tea party folks think of this?

Since there are at least five emails in my inbox all asking some variation of the same question about last night’s Senate election in Massachusetts, let me share a couple quick thoughts..

Obviously it’s a big win for Republicans and a tough one for Democrats. All the conservative talk radio shows were practically giddy with excitement this morning at the news that Republican Scott Brown would be the next Senator from the state and I imagine the same is true for most of the conservative blogs around the Country as well. While I didn’t pay a lot of attention to the race myself, the things I did hear were interesting and I think there are a few things each party can take away from the race.

For Democrats, there’s a lot to take away from the loss. I think the biggest problem is you had a candidate in Coakley who literally went on vacation for two weeks and took the election for granted because it had traditionally been a “D” seat. There are people who saying the campaign didn’t even do polling because they thought it was so in the bag which for a US Senate seat is just mind blowing. Rank and file Democrats are frustrated and unhappy right now with the way things are going and they made that clear by voting for Brown 25% of the time. Get better candidates who can speak to the issues people are facing and understand that if you don’t do what you were sent to office to do, you won’t be there long.

For Republicans, I would say the danger for them is reading too much into the win. Many on the right are calling this the largest upset in American political history and are going to feel emboldened to push their agenda through now more than ever. So congrats, you got the 41st vote which means you as a party can go back to blocking everything in the Senate, but be careful of that approach since the voters expect you to get something done as well. Yes, it’s a big win for you, but it’s not the first time that a Republican has won state wide office (Remember Mitt Romney?) nor will it be the last I suspect. You had a good candidate who worked very hard and was able to take advantage of a special election that got national attention, his two attractive daughters doing commercials, a lazy opponent, and highlight part of his beliefs (fiscal) while downplaying others (social conservatism) all of which came together for a win. That was obviously the recipe for victory in Massachusetts last night, but I’m not so sure if it’s a dish that will be easily recreated in other elections this November.

One last thing about the whole “60 vote” thing in the Senate. I have heard several pundits on blogs, TV and the radio talking about how Democrats have had 60 votes for a year and haven’t been able to accomplish anything despite that.

That’s wrong of course. A year ago, Democrats had 57 seats in the Senate and “Independent” Joe Lieberman caucused with them for 58. 59 came last spring when Pennsylvania Senator Arlen Spector switched parties and 60 came when Al Franken from Minnesota was sworn in last July. Having a majority of 59 Senators is still “good” for Democrats in that they’re in the majority. Unfortunately, it takes a super majority in the Senate to get anything done right now, just the way the founding fathers wanted it.