Senate stays in session

Discussion in 'Politics' started by Steerpike, Dec 27, 2007.

  1. Steerpike
    Offline

    Steerpike VIP Member

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2007
    Messages:
    1,847
    Thanks Received:
    182
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Ratings:
    +182
    Technically speaking. It is done to avoid recess appointments. They have one Senator go in every day and officially convene a session of the Senate. Typically, there isn't going to be anyone else there so the Senate isn't really in session. It's just a technicality.

    Any thoughts on this? Misuse of the process or legitimate political tactic. I tend to think of it more along the lines of a legitimate tactic, though the Democrats doing it will just ensure that every Senate does this from here on out whenever the President is of the other party, so it starts another area where tit-for-tat will be played. Still, it seems the Senate can do this legitimately.

    As an aside, I think if you're going to have a filibuster the Senate ought to require Senators to actually filibuster, not just take a quick headcount to see if there are 60 votes to end one if it DID happen.
     
  2. Annie
    Offline

    Annie Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2003
    Messages:
    50,847
    Thanks Received:
    4,644
    Trophy Points:
    1,790
    Ratings:
    +4,770
    It's legitimate and divisive. Just like the use of politics of personal destruction, overuse of filabusters, blocking of appointments, investigations after investigations, special prosecutors, what goes around comes around. The people be damned.
     
  3. Steerpike
    Offline

    Steerpike VIP Member

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2007
    Messages:
    1,847
    Thanks Received:
    182
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Ratings:
    +182
    I don't think all of those other things are "legitimate" though. The politics of personal destruction (which has become a catch-phrase) is not legitimate in many applications. Use of subpoena power or investigational authority can certainly be illegitimate and an abuse of authority, depending on how it is applied. Same goes for special prosecutors.

    But yes, these are all used as political tools these days. But most Americans don't demand such powers be used legitimately. They just want to root for their team (D) or (R), and stick a finger in the other guy's eye. With a citizenry like that we get what we deserve.
     
  4. Annie
    Offline

    Annie Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2003
    Messages:
    50,847
    Thanks Received:
    4,644
    Trophy Points:
    1,790
    Ratings:
    +4,770
    There is no way to legally stop the politics of personal destruction, unless the candidate sues for liable or slander. That might be an interesting case, but we know where those standards are. The whole thing about special prosecutors, sort of like the aforementioned, there really are few limits and would take a more than boatload of money to sue for harrassment.

    I concur though with deserving the government we choose. Too few bother to follow.
     
  5. Meemer
    Offline

    Meemer Member

    Joined:
    Dec 3, 2007
    Messages:
    44
    Thanks Received:
    7
    Trophy Points:
    6
    Ratings:
    +7
    I have to try to look at why these powers were added to the arsenal of whatever branch can exercise them.
    People had to be playing the 'what if' game because things had happened that compromised the system.
    For example: Let's go back to the Reagan admin. when some of the same people currently in this admin. (Rums and Cheney come to mind quickly and some others had to have been there). Their jobs were to find ways of legally stretching executive powers. They dug and dug and their toil came to fruition with George the Lesser. I have no idea what was done with George the First's admin. and his corruption of power but it's clear to all the amount of stretching that's been done over the past seven years. (Unfortunately for the DC gang, manyof there efforts have not been legal, see the Justice Dept., Plame, and so on.) Therefore I have to agree to whatever retaliatory tactic is employed to stop the abuse, regardless of whichever party uses it whenever.
    And what's wrong with a good old-fashioned, Jimmy Stewart type of filibuster?
     
  6. Steerpike
    Offline

    Steerpike VIP Member

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2007
    Messages:
    1,847
    Thanks Received:
    182
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Ratings:
    +182
    Nothing wrong with a Jimmy Stewart style filibuster. That kind is fine. I don't care for it when they just pretend someone filibustered because they don't have 60 votes and they all go home.
     
  7. Meemer
    Offline

    Meemer Member

    Joined:
    Dec 3, 2007
    Messages:
    44
    Thanks Received:
    7
    Trophy Points:
    6
    Ratings:
    +7
    I don't like that either, Steer.
     
  8. RetiredGySgt
    Offline

    RetiredGySgt Platinum Member

    Joined:
    May 6, 2007
    Messages:
    39,551
    Thanks Received:
    5,899
    Trophy Points:
    1,140
    Location:
    North Carolina
    Ratings:
    +8,970
    Yup, the next time the Republicans control the Senate and the President is a Dem if they do this exact stunt you will hear the howls from the libs about obstruction and usurping power and any other claim to bad mouth the move and of course the press will be right there egging them on.
     
  9. Taomon
    Offline

    Taomon Active Member

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2007
    Messages:
    1,563
    Thanks Received:
    47
    Trophy Points:
    36
    Ratings:
    +47
    This seems to be the only way to keep Bush from ushering more harmful appointments who would never make through a Senate hearing anyhow.

    Any president that uses the recess to circumvent Constitutional law should be slapped, but that God we have some Senators willing to put an end to this practice.
     
  10. RetiredGySgt
    Offline

    RetiredGySgt Platinum Member

    Joined:
    May 6, 2007
    Messages:
    39,551
    Thanks Received:
    5,899
    Trophy Points:
    1,140
    Location:
    North Carolina
    Ratings:
    +8,970
    Are you stupid? It is Constitutional to make the appointments. Another moron that can not read nor comprehend the document that establishes our Government at the Federal level.

    And remember these words when the Senate is controlled by Republicans and they finally do to a Democrat what the Democrats have done to this President.
     

Share This Page