news-record.com

BLOGS

Off the Record

More obstructionism in the Senate

Everyone who accused Senate Democrats of bribery for horse-trading over health-care reform votes now should call out Republican Sen. Richard Shelby for extortion. He's reportedly demanding federal funding for projects in Alabama and holding up some 70 administration nominations unless he gets them.

I didn't use the b word in relation to Harry Reid, Ben Nelson, Mary Landrieu and others simply because money wasn't going into their own pockets.

Yes, wheeling and dealing with taxpayers' money isn't much better, but as long as ultimately it was being used for public, not private benefit, it didn't count as a crime in my view.

So I won't tag Shelby with the e word. He's looking out for his home state.

Still, these tactics stink to high heaven. They don't serve the greater good of the people of the United States and they don't meet the standard of conduct that ought to govern the Senate -- if anyone can remember what that standard used to be.

I don't know which 70 nominations Shelby has put on hold, but if they include North Carolina Judges Jim Wynn and Albert Diaz, waiting for final confirmation to the 4th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals, I'm doubly peeved at Shelby. Why should their progress be impeded for the sake of pork-barrel projects in Alabama? If Shelby wants money for his home state, let him file a bill and take it to the appropriations committee.

Permalink

Posted by Doug Clark on Friday, February 5, 2010 at 2:10 pm

This article has been closed to new comments. Comments are generally closed after 14 days. However, comments may be closed earlier at the discretion of the News & Record.

Inappropriate content? Please report abuse.

Advertisement | Advertise with Us

Bosco

February 5, 2010 - 3:27 pm EST

Sounds like he knows how to line up votes to me. Oh, someone already beat me to that

Doug

February 5, 2010 - 3:31 pm EST

Really not the wisest thing that someone ever said.

Mark Sutter

February 5, 2010 - 4:40 pm EST

Ever wonder why something like that is not reported for months until Gibbs says something? It seems like there would be some natural curiosity among the White House press corps about so many appointments being hung up. Maybe they find there's good reason, maybe not, but it sure doesn't seem like anyone is doing their job. .

Andrew Clark

February 5, 2010 - 5:09 pm EST

You're right that there has been huge obstruction to nominees for the past year (the new head of the TSA was confirmed by a 94-2 vote yesterday after being held up for nine months by Sen. DeMint for example). However this blanket hold on all nominees is unprecedented and just happened in the today. Unlike most holds, a practice I dislike no matter who is doing it, this one has absolutely nothing to do with a the nominees themselves and really is Shelby throwing halting the whole Senate not on any pretense of principle, but to get a few billion dollars thrown at his state. One of his demands is especially dubious as he wants the air force to change around their specifications for a new tanker so Northrup (who has a lot of workers in Alabama) would be more likely to get the contract than Boeing.

Mark Sutter

February 5, 2010 - 5:39 pm EST

Gotcha, thanks. Didn't read carefully enough to realize the blanket hold had just happened.

Connie Mack Jr

February 5, 2010 - 5:48 pm EST

Why should their progress be impeded for the sake of pork-barrel projects in Alabama? If Shelby wants money for his home state, let him file a bill and take it to the appropriations committee.* Doug

You got that right! Just this week! The recent newly elected Republican Senator Brown from Mass said the same thing that his main job was to get the Pork for Mass first and procreate the USA last.......You wanted Republican change and guess what! It's Obama change with the usual Republican lying Hope!.

Badgolfer1

February 5, 2010 - 10:19 pm EST

Apparently a hold is similar to a filibuster and if enough senators were not willing to go along with him then Shelby could not get by with doing as he has done.

Paul Daniels

February 6, 2010 - 7:53 pm EST

I saw Shelby on televsion and couldn't believe that he was holding up nominations for pet programs. This is the worst sort of government. We should eschew all politicians who use their power to extract special concessions from the national purse.

Having said that, however, there are legitimate reasons to hold up nomination such as Erroll G. Southers who was nominated as the TSA chief. Souther had used his position at the FBI twenty years ago to run a background check on his estraged wife's boyfriend. DeMint and others also objected to Souther over concerns that he would allow collective bargaining at TSA - not a good idea to allow those tasked with ensuring safe travel in these days of terrorism to strike over wage, etc. if you ask me.

Andrew Clark

February 8, 2010 - 12:58 pm EST

First of all, Southers would not have had the power to let TSA employees collectively bargain. DeMint just wanted to do some union bashing. Secondly, the TSA employees would have a hard time striking over wages as they would be subject to the same government pay scale as all other federal employees. There are lots of unionized federal employees, but when's the last time you heard of any striking over wages? On principle I think it's an egregious abuse of power to say any people cannot collectively bargain. I never heard a convincing argument about why such a ban doesn't violate the first amendment.

retiree

February 7, 2010 - 5:55 am EST

Doug,

You said "because money wasn't going into their own pockets" in relation to Harry Reid, Ben Nelson, etc., but isn't that a little naive? I mean, Ben and Mary got something for their vote so don't you think they will eventually end up with money in their pockets through political contributions?

It's also amazing that now the Republicans have a veto proof minority you'd criticize them since putting holds on nominees has been a practice for years (personally I'd get rid of it and have a floor vote on all nominees). And if you wanted the seats to be filled on the 4th Circuit, why didn't you chastize the Dems for holding up the process of nominations in the last years of George Bush' term?

In reading your article, and others in the past, my sense is you have shown a bias toward the Dems and not as an impartial observer.

Doug

February 7, 2010 - 2:57 pm EST

I was very critical of John Edwards for holding up Bush nominee Terence Boyle of North Carolina. Edwards later agreed to allow the confirmation of Allyson Duncan of North Carolina, a moderate Republican judge.

There is political benefit for senators who horse trade for benefits for their home states, but this doesn't amount to the criminal actions of bribery and extortion.

Doug Johnson

February 7, 2010 - 6:45 am EST

When Landrieu and Nelson pulled this stunt, they were skillful negotiators, when Shelby does it, he a obstructionist. I wonder what far left liberal extremist, wrote both stories?
Any wonder Dan Rather another far left liberals extremist, is begging the congress to save newspapers?
They are incapable of saving themselves.

Andrew Clark

February 8, 2010 - 12:51 pm EST

Landrieu and Nelson never have pulled this stunt. In fact, no one ever has. Lots of Senators have used holds, Edwards and Helms from NC did extensively, but the blanket hold has not been done and doesn't just slow down one nominee, it brings the Senate to a halt.