The United States of Kentucky

Chew Toy McCoy

Pleb
Vaccinated
Site Donor
Posts
5,560
Reaction score
8,417
Mitch McConnell has way too much power and on some level I’d argue he has more power than the President. One man voted into office by one state. I don’t understand how this allowable in this country. I realize he’s just the current politician in that position, but I wouldn’t agree with it even if he was on my team. I think the whole reason it's allowed to continue is because Democrats hope they will eventually have that seat of power to also abuse. I think this matters even more than whoever the current President is. It’s an abuse of power that shouldn’t exist.
 

SuperMatt

Suspended
Posts
7,690
Reaction score
14,508
Mitch McConnell has way too much power and on some level I’d argue he has more power than the President. One man voted into office by one state. I don’t understand how this allowable in this country. I realize he’s just the current politician in that position, but I wouldn’t agree with it even if he was on my team. I think the whole reason it's allowed to continue is because Democrats hope they will eventually have that seat of power to also abuse. I think this matters even more than whoever the current President is. It’s an abuse of power that shouldn’t exist.
The Senators could elect a new majority leader... but they won’t. In some ways, our system is better than many parliamentary democracies, because there you just vote for a local candidate, then the representatives all get together and pick a prime minister. The people don’t directly pick their Prime Minister. Other than the weird aspects of electoral college system, the people in America do get to pick their own president.
 

iLunar

Power User
Posts
94
Reaction score
252
Agreed. How many people voted for Mitch vs Biden? The Senate was not designed to operate the way Mitch has the passed decade. He's abusing rules left and right that the framers did not intend.
 

lizkat

Melting Down
Vaccinated
Site Donor
Posts
5,470
Reaction score
11,682
Location
Catskill Mountains
Mitch McConnell has way too much power and on some level I’d argue he has more power than the President. One man voted into office by one state. I don’t understand how this allowable in this country. I realize he’s just the current politician in that position, but I wouldn’t agree with it even if he was on my team. I think the whole reason it's allowed to continue is because Democrats hope they will eventually have that seat of power to also abuse. I think this matters even more than whoever the current President is. It’s an abuse of power that shouldn’t exist.

Yeah and the Democrats haven't even yet adopted any committee chair term limits that the Republicans finally did agree to in their caucus.

I was not pleased to see Durbin angling to hold three top posts this year.. He went for the slot Feinstein had at Judiciary...but he's already been the Senate Democrats' whip for a decade or more and has also held the top slot on the Appropriations subcommittee. He probably figured he had the Judiciary slot coming because he's been living in Schumer's shadow for so long as whip.

Apparently now he's giving up the Appropriations post but is actually kinda whining about how it's a personal and professional "sacrifice" to support putting limits on the total count of leadership posts anyone in their caucus can hold.

Please. We need bench development, not trough hogs in that chamber. There are a bunch of other Dems holding high cards in there for a long time as well. It's not right. Experience is good and speaks to building up a store of institutional knowledge, but hanging on too long is costly in two ways: it embitters and demotivates formerly hopeful ascendants, and when "something happens" then they lose institutional knowledge in one fell swoop after one person keeps an iron fist on a slot for 20 years.

Sounds like the Dems are pushing for five-year terms on committee chair / ranking member posts going forward, AND some limit, to be determined, on how many committee or subcommittee panels one may head up or serve on as ranking member.... AND... some want to ditch the Dems' erstwhile reliance on seniority and open up competition for higher level posts.

It's a start. The ones who will probably not like it most are the ones who've already languished behind some of these guys holding ranking member chairs of full committees for 20 years or more. At least the mid-rank ones could always pick up an additional subcommittee slot once in awhile while waiting for someone to die.

Now we have Whitehouse deciding seniority is so over, after waiting 14 years waiting for Feinstein to retire and now watching Durbin decide to claim the slot after she stepped back... so he's challenging Durbin for the Judiciary slot even though Durbin said he'd relinquish Appropriations and hold only the whip post and Judiciary.

( So Durbin's now like wait what just happened here could I end up just being whip and Schumer still trucking along as leader?)

OK. so as a voter? I don't care who listens to some (probably GOP) chair gavel a subcommittee to order. Pass some fricken infrastructure bills or somethiing.


Just below Durbin in the ranks, Sens. Patty Murray (D-Wash.) and Debbie Stabenow (Mich.) hold elected leadership positions that come with staff budgets and some extra office space, while they also serve as the top Democrat on two full committees and on influential subcommittees.

Some have talked about expanding Kaine’s proposal to include at least those two leadership posts. Others are aggressively pushing to install term limits on the top spot for committees, similar to the six-year limit Republicans impose on their chairmen.

Whitehouse, 65, after 14 years in the Senate, is no higher than fourth in seniority on the four legislative committees that he serves — probably requiring at least another 10 years to reach the top spot on any of the panels, maybe longer, without any rules changes.

Sen. Patrick J. Leahy (D-Vt.), the longest serving senator, by contrast, has held a top committee position for 26 straight years, first at Judiciary and now at the Appropriations Committee.

Schumer has deputized Sen. Ben Cardin (D-Md.), a trusted operator by both generations of the caucus, to moderate the debate and assemble new rules proposals. The caucus is expected to have several conference calls discussing them, with votes possible as early as next week.
 

Alli

Perfection
Staff Member
Vaccinated
Site Donor
Posts
4,773
Reaction score
9,648
Location
Alabackwards
Just another reason for term limits.

And the Senate Majority Leader should not be the only one who can bring a vote to the floor.
 

lizkat

Melting Down
Vaccinated
Site Donor
Posts
5,470
Reaction score
11,682
Location
Catskill Mountains
Just another reason for term limits.

And the Senate Majority Leader should not be the only one who can bring a vote to the floor.

What I sometimes don't like is rules about limiting ability to co-sponsor bills across the aisle. They let them do it on feel-good stuff but not more key type or hot button issues. Whom does that serve? Parties, not constituents.
 

fooferdoggie

Elite Member
Vaccinated
Site Donor
Posts
2,529
Reaction score
4,165
yes he is crazy powerful and he could give a fuck who knows it and could care less about anyone knowing about his corruption.
 

Chew Toy McCoy

Pleb
Vaccinated
Site Donor
Posts
5,560
Reaction score
8,417
The Senators could elect a new majority leader... but they won’t. In some ways, our system is better than many parliamentary democracies, because there you just vote for a local candidate, then the representatives all get together and pick a prime minister. The people don’t directly pick their Prime Minister. Other than the weird aspects of electoral college system, the people in America do get to pick their own president.
I'm saying nobody should be allowed to be in that much control. It's not a matter of voting in a different person into that position. Last I heard, and this is probably well over a year ago, there are well over 400 bills just collecting dust on his desk with absolutely no mechanism in place to change that status.

I also heard recently that there is some rule or strategy that if a bill doesn't seem like it will pass as soon as it gets tossed on his desk then they aren't going to bother to debate it on the floor either.
 

Huntn

Whatwerewe talk'n about?
Vaccinated
Site Donor
Posts
4,078
Reaction score
4,111
Location
The Misty Mountains
I'm saying nobody should be allowed to be in that much control. It's not a matter of voting in a different person into that position. Last I heard, and this is probably well over a year ago, there are well over 400 bills just collecting dust on his desk with absolutely no mechanism in place to change that status.

I also heard recently that there is some rule or strategy that if a bill doesn't seem like it will pass as soon as it gets tossed on his desk then they aren't going to bother to debate it on the floor either.
I agree one person who holds majority leader should not completely control the agenda, in this case The Senate on behalf of his party. This becomes apparent when the chamber is split 51/49. Of course when the situation is flipped, then Republicans will be willing to consider it. 👀

A caveat I can see Democrats being in a similar boat, but I’ll argue they have not stooped to the level of deceit as the GOP.
 
Top Bottom