A Do-Nothing Congress Explained
This has been one of the most do-nothing congresses in quite some time. I think I now know why. Its leadership is significantly to the left of the rank and file. This is why the congress does nothing, and when its forced to do something, it calls a recess and goes on vacation as it did when drilling was such a big issue. Nothing the leadership wants to do would be acceptable to the rank and file and so either the leadership gets defeated by its own party, or the leadership caves to the rank and file.
Barney Frank and Chris Dodd craft a bailout plan with the approval of Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, and the OK of Obama, and 40% of democrats vote against it. The leaders don't control the party. They know it. They could dodge a vote on the drilling issue, but not on the bailout issue. Even when Reid, Pelosi, and Obama provide cover, 40% of Dems turn and go the other direction.
Looking at the Missouri delegation, its the far left that voted no, and most of the Republicans. Roy Blunt is the outlier, I suspect because he is part of the leadership that negotiated the plan.
Using the scoring method of voteview.com, here is the Missouri Delegation again, in order of their voteview score, with their bailout vote and party affiliation.
* Dist. 1 - Rep. William Lacy Clay No 49 D
* Dist. 5 - Rep. Emanuel Cleaver No 113 D
* Dist. 3 - Rep. Russ Carnahan Yes 133 D
* Dist. 4 - Rep. Ike Skelton Yes 212 D
* Dist. 8 - Rep. Jo Ann Emerson Yes 256 R
* Dist. 9 - Rep. Kenny Hulshof No 286 R
* Dist. 7 - Rep. Roy Blunt Yes 342 R
* Dist. 6 - Rep. Sam Graves No 362 R
* Dist. 2 - Rep. Todd Akin No 407 R
Monday, September 29, 2008
Missouri Congre4ssional Delegation on the Monday Bailout vote
* Dist. 1 - Rep. William Lacy Clay No
* Dist. 2 - Rep. Todd Akin No
* Dist. 3 - Rep. Russ Carnahan Yes
* Dist. 4 - Rep. Ike Skelton Yes
* Dist. 5 - Rep. Emanuel Cleaver No
* Dist. 6 - Rep. Sam Graves No
* Dist. 7 - Rep. Roy Blunt Yes
* Dist. 8 - Rep. Jo Ann Emerson Yes
* Dist. 9 - Rep. Kenny Hulshof No
* Dist. 1 - Rep. William Lacy Clay No
* Dist. 2 - Rep. Todd Akin No
* Dist. 3 - Rep. Russ Carnahan Yes
* Dist. 4 - Rep. Ike Skelton Yes
* Dist. 5 - Rep. Emanuel Cleaver No
* Dist. 6 - Rep. Sam Graves No
* Dist. 7 - Rep. Roy Blunt Yes
* Dist. 8 - Rep. Jo Ann Emerson Yes
* Dist. 9 - Rep. Kenny Hulshof No
Sunday, September 21, 2008
I just had occasion to listen to the Aug 28th 2008 edition of Extension 720. I started listening to Milt Rosenberg as a child while my parents listened to the show. Rosenberg is thoughtful, professorial, and respectful of his guests. Upon the occasion of National Review contributor, Stanley Kurtz, being on town (doing research on Obama and the Annenberg Challenge), Extension 720 booked him for the following day. They contacted the Obama campaign national headquarters just down the street and requested a representative to provide a contrasting point of view. However the Obama campaign had no interest in participation as evidenced by the fact that instead of discussing sending a person, they hung up on the show's producer and sent out an e-mail asking people to call in and complain.
Its bad enough that the campaign's responce to its critics was to slander him an attempt to silence him, rather than to send someone to confront Kurtz in a debate where Rosenberg would have insured a useful and productive exchange. But they also used their own non-participation as a primary cause for attack. They chose to send no representative, so the responsibility for the absence of a Obama defender is their own, not WGN's.
It is worth noting that on September 16th, when David Freddoso was the guest author, Extension 720 found a willing defender of Obama, Dan Johnson-Weinberger, an activist and former student of Obama's rather than get burned again by the campiagn tactic of not sending a represenative and then complaining that they were not represented.
While it is true that the Kurtz interview happened during the Democratic convention, the notion that the Obama campian was unavailable to do media during their convention is absurd. You do major events to get people talking, so of course people are available to capitalize on the media. The campaign chose not to do Extension 720. The late notice (first thing that day, 13 hours advance) is more of an issue, but not at all uncommon in the media, where responding to news is so common. The booking itself was late, so advanced notice was impossible.
Here is a link to a Kansas City media blogger.
Its bad enough that the campaign's responce to its critics was to slander him an attempt to silence him, rather than to send someone to confront Kurtz in a debate where Rosenberg would have insured a useful and productive exchange. But they also used their own non-participation as a primary cause for attack. They chose to send no representative, so the responsibility for the absence of a Obama defender is their own, not WGN's.
It is worth noting that on September 16th, when David Freddoso was the guest author, Extension 720 found a willing defender of Obama, Dan Johnson-Weinberger, an activist and former student of Obama's rather than get burned again by the campiagn tactic of not sending a represenative and then complaining that they were not represented.
While it is true that the Kurtz interview happened during the Democratic convention, the notion that the Obama campian was unavailable to do media during their convention is absurd. You do major events to get people talking, so of course people are available to capitalize on the media. The campaign chose not to do Extension 720. The late notice (first thing that day, 13 hours advance) is more of an issue, but not at all uncommon in the media, where responding to news is so common. The booking itself was late, so advanced notice was impossible.
Here is a link to a Kansas City media blogger.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)