Unlike Robert Kuttner, I can imagine the Republicans successfully filibustering the opening of debate on financial reforms. But I hope he’s right that they are bluffing. There’s been surprisingly little pre-game hype over the vote tomorrow. I think it will be one of the most important votes of Obama’s first term. And, if the Democrats achieve cloture, things will get very, very interesting during the votes on amendments.
About The Author
BooMan
Martin Longman a contributing editor at the Washington Monthly. He is also the founder of Booman Tribune and Progress Pond. He has a degree in philosophy from Western Michigan University.
As I tried to say in the past with Richard Shelby, he knows his shit on this topic and should not be toyed with. I’m happy to see the President slap his hand away. His knowledge far surpasses that of Dodd, and I think Frank knew that. Sure, you could say they urged him not to cut a deal because of what we knew would happen would, but I think Frank was worried about that snake oil salesman’s finance knowledge.
Kudos to both the President and Frank.
I can imagine them filibustering, too. This is not like the old days with reading off of a phonebook. It’s incredibly easy to filibuster with that many in your party committed to it. Add on to the fact that in all honesty that no Republican seat is in that hot of water in the Senate, and you have Republicans willing to do it.
We’ll see. I think most of this depends on how the media portrays it, and what kind of questions they ask.
Don’t forget, Shelby is the one Republican(though he was a Democrat then) to vote against repealing Glass-Steagall. Can anyone guess the 7 Senate Democrats who voted against repeal(And no looking it up on Wikipedia!!!)?
Two I’m pretty sure about are Feingold and Dorgan. Who are the rest?
I don’t want to ruin it and look at Wikipedia. But I know four others were Boxer, Mikulski, Wellstone and Harkin. There was also someone from Nevada(who is no longer in the Senate .. the guy that preceded Ensign). So that leaves one.
True, but he was a Democrat then. Not that party makes much of a difference on this issue, per se, but his switching parties has pushed his voting record far to the right (and we both know that they’re opposing stuff for the sake of it).
I just don’t trust a Republican on this issue when they’re that knowledgeable. It might be irrational, but it’s my gut feeling. Maybe if I saw some of his proposals I could have my thinking eased.
I agree on today’s cloture vote. If the Republicans remain united today, it will be interesting how long they can hold out…and whether the Democrats will force repeated cloture votes without compromising the bill.
Near the end of his column, Kuttner makes an important point that we progressives need reminding of.
The New Deal did not happen overnight. It took FDR (with larger Democratic majorities and a more thoroughly disgraced Republican party) seven years to pass the key laws that regulated Wall St.—and Main St.—banks for the next generation.
All of us who are frustrated because “Obama is no FDR” need reminders that the historical FDR is “no FDR” compared with the FDR of our romanticized imaginations.
I’ve made the point that FDR was no FDR a couple of times before. For the same reasons.
True, you have. (I think I was still reacting to comments in an earlier thread.)
I think that this will work out if the Democrats are united; and I think there are enough corporate democrats who are iffy on the derivatives issue but that hasn’t exploded b/c no one wants to be on the side of the banks in public.
So Democrats are being frogmarched to stand together and Republicans are going to either filibuster or give way; and I think the fact that the talking point is that a vote against cloture is not a vote against financial reform is bs. Democrats need to hit them on the head w/a two by four over that simple lie.
Honestly I think it depends on what the Dems have ready if the GOP does filibuster (and yes, I can picture it too). If they actually get the message out that the GOP is not blocking a bill, but rather blocking WORKING on a bill – the optics are terrible. At least if it’s a vote on a bill, the GOP can say something in it is unacceptable. But no matter what they don’t like about the bill now, they can offer amendments. They can still change it. The fact that they would block their own ability to change the bill is a freakin’ gift to Dems politically.
I don’t know if it’s a bluff. I think Dems should move forward assuming it’s not though. They should have a plan in place, and should have had every evening show booked with a member of Congress tonight – so that in either case they can push their spin. If it moves to debate, it’s a grand (bipartisan) step forward on reforming Wall Street, if it gets blocked, it’s a GOP unwilliing to even WORK on a bill to regulate Wall Street.
Hope for the best, plan for the worst.
Also, @Booman:
“I think it will be one of the most important votes of Obama’s first term.”
Am I the only one noticing that we’ve heard this statement several times over the course of his Presidency? The Stimulus vote would make or break his Presidency. The SC nomination was a huge test. The Health Care vote would determine his place in history.
I’ll bet immigration reform will be one of the biggest votes of his first term. And climate change. And anything else he plans on taking up.
Jesus, now that I think about it…what’s left for his second term? He’ll likely have tackled Health Care, Wall Street, Immigration, Climate Change, and at least 2 Surpreme Court Justices. That’s a transformative President, right there.
I’ve had the same thoughts. But it will suit him well not to have any major reforms on his platter in the next Congress, because he will have to govern much closer to the middle with smaller majorities.
I’m not sure if I agree with “much smaller” majorities. I’ve been saying for months now that immigration reform should be next on the docket, both for policy and political reasons. It appears that Dems are doing just that…and right on queue we have Josh Marshal seeing the possible landscape changing:
http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/2010/04/out_of_the_blue.php
“Put that all together and Democrats have strong policy and political reasons to push immigration reform to the top of the legislative agenda. And then on top of all that add the match provided by the outrageous and almost certainly unconstitutional law passed and signed in Arizona and the November election could be very different from what we’d envisioned only a few weeks ago.”
Really though…the biggest factor will be the economy. If Dems can get progressively positive economic data from now until November, they’ll have a great chance of blunting the anti-incumbant wave.