December 14th, 2006
I like this: a Democratic held Senate through 2012…
A Long-Term Senate Democratic Majority?
By Chuck Todd, NationalJournal.com
© National Journal Group Inc.
Wednesday, Dec. 13, 2006
One reason why Republicans were particularly depressed about losing the Senate this cycle was the demoralizing realization that the party may not have another realistic shot at getting the majority back until 2012.
In fact, Democrats weren’t supposed to pick up any seats in 2006, because the GOP appeared to have the better opportunities. After all, despite holding just 45 seats (counting Vermont independent Jim Jeffords’), Democrats had to defend 18. Furthermore, four of the five Democrats who knocked off GOP incumbents in 2000 were facing their first re-election contests this year.
November 14th, 2006
Unfortunately we’ll not have the opportunity to vote for Sen. Feingold for president, since he’s decided to drop out of the 2008 nomination race. Fortunately, however, the senator remains in congress, where he can and will contribute as Dems reclaim control of the House and Senate following the 2006 mid-term elections. And the good senator is not wasting any time in reminding us, the public, what’s at stake during the next three months of a Republican controlled lame duck session in Congress. Senator Feingold writes:
In January, we will be looking at a new Congress, and with Democratic majorities in the House and Senate, we will be looking at a new national policy agenda. I know that I am looking forward to moving the progressive agenda forward in the next Congress. But Democrats can’t just kick back and take it easy for the next few weeks.
It would be a huge mistake to overlook the potential for damage in the lame duck session. A lame duck session doesn’t sound like anything to worry about, but this lame duck may be a lot more dangerous than people think. We can expect Republicans to try to jam through as much of their agenda as they can while they have the chance.
Democrats have to stick together and show Republicans - and the country - that we have what it takes to stop them.
[...]
There are a lot of bad bills that the Republicans may try to ram through, but here’s the worst of the worst - a bill to legalize the President’s warrantless wiretapping program. The White House is desperate to enact this bill, which allows the government to spy on American citizens, on American soil, without a warrant.
Other measures on the White House wish list that are likely to surface during the lame duck session include a number of unfunded tax cuts and questionable trade measures.
[...]
Republicans would love to extend a bunch of tax breaks during the lame duck - without paying for them, of course.
[...]
There will be a lot of pressure on the current Democratic congressional leadership to give in to the Republican agenda. And Democratic enablers are well placed to help Republicans advance their agenda, while many other Democrats will just want to go home for the holidays. But too much is at stake for us to let that happen.
[...]
After the gains we made on November 7, it would be easy to just relax and bask in the victory - but it would also be a big mistake. The lame duck is the Republicans’ last chance to pass bills on the White House’s wish list, and we shouldn’t let them get away with it. It is the Democrats’ turn to lead Congress, and we can start strong by rejecting the Republicans’ last ditch efforts in the lame duck session.
Of course, the Senator is right.
It’s too bad that we won’t have the opportunity to support this man in 2008 for US president.
