Senate closed session -- why is this a big deal?

[Duer 157099]

Someone please help me understand this. I've read plenty of threads here, and still cannot see what the big deal is.

1) why is a closed session such a bad thing? So what if the dems did this every day, what is the true impact?

2) how would Frist have prevented Reid from doing what he did, if he had told him first that he was planning it?

3) how does going into a closed session ensure that the investigation will get jump started?

There must be some nuances that I'm missing.

[nadinbrzezinski]

1. Because it is rarely used, and

it threw the connies into a spin

It also means taking the lead on setting the agenda

[Duer 157099]

8. rarely used doesn't in itself mean it's bad

does it?

Maybe rarely used because there have always been other avenues.

I'm still confused.

[LittleClarkie]

2. Reid threatened to keep disrupting the Senate

and making them all have to report to their seats each day until the intelligence investigation the Intelligence committee was supposed to be conducting actually started up again.

It was a disruption move.

[bluethruandthru]

5. I, too was wondering

Thanks for clearing things up. But, it still seems like the repugs are making "much ado about nothing"...or very little. Listening to Frist and Roberts you'd think the Dems locked them out of the room!

[Tab]

3. As I understand it...

As Senate Majority Leader, Bill Frist sets the agenda - what business gets discussed for the day. They were planning on discussing Alito or whatever.

Under Rule 21, Reid, with another Senator to second it, was entitled to throw the Senate into closed session. This is usually meant to discuss some business best done in secret (e.g.: a war issue).

By doing so, they (1) pissed off Frist, who had his agenda derailed, (2) grabbed the media spotlight, and (3) focused attention on THEIR issue (Iraq and the CIA leak).

This pissed off Frist mightily, who had his plans for the day derailed and was caught off guard.

[Duer 157099]

7. OK, I get that part

but why can't they just continue their business as usual (set by Frist) in closed session?

Do different rules apply when the Senate is in closed sesssion, like the leader can't lead, or bills cannot be passed, or such?

[Tandalayo_Scheisskopf]

4. Because the repukes just got kicked in the balls.

Their hand has been forced. They now have to address one of the most critical issues to ever face this nation: was our entrance into the Iraq conflict based upon flawed intelligence, cooked intelligence and outright lies by the administration.

They have spent 2+ years trying to evade, avoid and stonewall this issue. With one sentance and a grand physical gesture, senate procedural magician Harry Reid made all that come tumbling down.

They have been hoist on their own petard, they know it and they know things will probably just get worse. That is why they have more whine than The Gallo Brothers.

Plus no shortage of cheese.

[Duer 157099]

10. How are they forced to deal with the issue now?

By going into closed session, does Reid and the dems somehow wield more power?

I just don't get the downside of being in closed session -- except for us the public who might want to hear what they are doing (a small minority of the public no doubt)

[CottonBear]

6. The Republicans held 6 closed session during Clinton's impeachment!

I don't remember hearing about them to be honest.

[beaconess]

9. It's a big deal because it wasn't dictated by the Republicans

and so they're having a fit.