Looks Like Harkin Just Gave Up - I Will Bet the Failibuster Was The Last Straw

[TheMastersNemesis]

I am sure that Harkin was thinking about retiring anyway. I am also sure he was more than disgusted with the "filibuster" I would like to hear what he has to say privately. I am sure there are a lot of cuss words.

The Senate Majority Leader blew it twice. He blew it the first time which was the most important time in 30 years. Here is why. Had Reid gone to the nuclear option in 2009, most of the legislation that Pelosi got passed in the House would have become law and the GOP could not have stopped it.

We would have had EFCA, a better health care law, equal pay for women, taxes on the rich, penalties for outsourcing jobs, etc. We would have shifted so many things left the GOP would have had a hard time reversing it because it would have been in effect and hard to repeal. We would have likely reversed the situation and been able to regulate the banks and Wall Street.

On top of that Reid put too many conservative bastards on the health care commission in the Senate and we end up with crap. And then it only passed on "reconciliation".

Senator Reid probably scuttled the chance of a generation to reverse most of the Reagan and Bush policies. Now we are stuck with a situation which will likely leave the next generation in virtual poverty because it is almost guaranteed that they will do much worse than their parents and grandparents..

What has happened just leaves you PISSED and ANGRY as a progressive and now the country will probably really go to crap over time.

[Purveyor]

1. I thinking the same...eom

[graham4anything]

2. Harkin is cutten running. Shame. Especially if his seat turns red.

He can then become one of those who whine and whine

taking the ball home and leaving the arena is a sure way to lose.
Ask Bill Bradley and Russ Feingold.

with more and more leaving, if the dems lose the senate, those whiners now will see that better that Reid didn't give up the tool that would help the dems
first john kerry
now harkin

hell, who needs elections if all the dems in the senate just up and quit?

[bigtree]

5. you've got to be kidding

your post is a shame.

[graham4anything]

6. Who is going to replace him?

and btw, I vocally supported him a few election cycles back, when people were calling
him(among many others) dino's. DLC, blah blah blah

last I heard, Iowa's senior senator is a republican
their gov. is a republican

what democratic person is going to replace him?

Unless he has a medical reason, to cede the seat to a rpeublican is a bigger shame

[bigtree]

8. christ

this kind of shit make me just hate the internet

[WinkyDink]

19. Nobody ever called HARKIN a "dino" or DLC, FGS.

[rurallib]

27. Harkin is one of the few real liberals left and

as an Iowan I invite you to come to our state. While the crazies get the headlines, you will find a majority of Iowans are decent progressive folks.
We have a republican governor because our last democrat really fucked up his chances, shit in his own nest, as it were.
We have Grassley as our other senator because few politicians are as slick at manipulating the press as old Chuck. He plays the hick outsmarting those city slickers better than if it was written in a play.

But Tom Harkin has more than earned his right to do what he wants.

[graham4anything]

41. again, who is going to replace him? That is the point.

when there are so few(really good ones) greedily, I do not want them to retire.

(same with the US Supreme Court people hang on until there is an opening to retire like
Souter did (same on the other hand that if it looks like the other side might win, best they retire earlier).

it's a shame, but when the two sides are direct opposites, the game of politics has to be played that way

and the Dems do NOT have a comforting lead (nor have they EVER in modern times had 60 since 60 was the standard(being that it took Al Franken, what, 9 months after election to actually be seated.)

[rurallib]

43. It will be a tough fight but right now Bruce Braley would probably

have to be considered the favorite. Bruce is the Democratic rep from district 1 in Iowa.
Republicans basically have 4 people with name recognition across Iowa. One is Grassley. Second is Branstad, the governor. His term is up in 2014 also and he is expected to run again.

One of the other two is Steve King. Yes that Steve King. He is the crazy from Northwest Iowa. He is a tea bagger supreme and his act does not play well in other parts of the state. He also tends to run away from real fights. I don't expect him to run, but he will make noises like he will. If he does he would have a real uphill battle.

The other is Bob VanderPlaats. VanderPlaats makes his living fighting abortion and gays. (literally that is how he makes his money. You may remember the stupid pledge every Repub candidate had to sign on to before the Iowa caucuses? That was his group.) His act is not playing well in Iowa these days. Candidates he backs with his goofy churchy group have a high failure rate. There are pockets of real right wing goofiness in Iowa, but they are mostly in Steve King's district. VP is really tight with Mike Huckabee.

Another outside possibility is Rep. Tom Latham from CD3. But few outside his district know him. His claim to fame is that he was the congressman that backed Bushco to the hilt and his office responds well to requests. His district is somewhat like King's.

If Braley doesn't run, Secretary of Ag Tom Vilsack may come back to run. Yeah, he's a Monsanto guy, but that don't make any difference here. Or perhaps his wife Christy may run. That would be a long shot. We have a couple other state level politicians with good name recognition and approval ratings.

Rumors I have heard is Braley for senate, Tom Vilsack to come back and run for governor again. The DemParty in CD1 is in good shape with several potential replacements for Braley. He won by a huge margin there last time. The Repubs in district 1 are about ready to kill each other.

Does that satisfy your curiosity? If the election were held tomorrow, Braley would be the odds on favorite. But there is 2 years and someone could pop up. Republicans in Iowa are still harping on gay marriage as one of their top issues. It doesn't even poll in the top 15 in Iowa opinion polls. Obama won the state handily.

[onenote]

22. you are being too polite calling it a shame

Its utter crap is what it is.

[WinkyDink]

18. See reply #3 to get some perspective.

[George II]

24. A 73 year old Senator with 30 years service is "cutten running"??? "Shame"??

With a post like that the "shame" belongs to YOU!

[Occulus]

37. Have you ever even once posted a single faintly progressive thought on DU?

I've never seen such from you.

Not. Once.

[Zoeisright]

3. He's 73 years old.

He deserves to retire if he wants to.

[Faygo Kid]

11. +1

I sure don't want to be working at 73. Breathing yes, working no.

[bigtree]

4. he can speak for himself

always has . . .

Jeff Zeleny ?@jeffzeleny

In a call from Iowa, Harkin tells me: "Too many people hang on to power for too long and that’s not right." Story: http://nyti.ms/WnJ2dy

[SoCalDem]

7. Senate Leaders should be from strong states

Look at the recent ones.. Daschle became a scalp on the belt of the Gop because he was always vulnerable ...Reid is no less a target because he's always vulnerable,,

The leader of the party in the senate & house should be from "safe" states/districts so that they are less likely to be "scared" into supporting CRAP..

Schumer should have been elected leader..

Reid is a milquetoast weasel who is not to be trusted..

[jeff47]

10. Schumer has an orgasm every time he says "bipartisan".

He's really not what we need at this time.

[bluestate10]

39. As long as each state has two Senators regardless of population, no Senate leader will not be

"scared". The Senate leader can try to influence votes, but as long as a Senator from states like Montana, South Dakota, North Carolina and Louisiana, to name some must cover their flanks to stay in office, there will be no progress that those Senators aren't willing to go along with. To make any other assumption is not only being unrealistic, it is also being child-like naive.

[frazzled]

9. No: his life called, and wants him back

Two things led to his resignation: his strong belief that he should not hold onto power for more than 40 years, but rather pass it on to the next generation; and his promise to spend his "golden" years with his wife, after 40 years of being consumed by his senate job.

These were his stated reasons, and if he had wanted to say that the filibuster thing, or the dysfunction of the Senate was the reason, he would have damned well said it. He is not one to mince words.

[riverbendviewgal]

12. Good luck Dems..

I hope you can overcome the scumbag republicans

[ananda]

13. Let's overcome our own scumbag Dino's first.

..

[bigtree]

17. just a thought

. . . Senate balance in the mix two years from now, yet this op is saying we should go full steam ahead with some scorched earth plan to tear down the filibusters.

First there's the likelihood that republicans in power would then want to use their own slim majority to bend the rules back their way.

Second, would we even have enough defenses against republican initiatives under our own changes; even under the ones we just negotiated?

It's always a bold view from the majority. I was just fine with using everything Senate leaders could come up with to block the Bushes and Reagan in my time. I'm all for some farsightedness on the filibusters.

Besides, removing republican power to filibuster (in whatever form) doesn't solve the problem of recalcitrant Democrats when we need their votes. That's been the rub, more often then not.

[truebluegreen]

44. Fear of what the republicans may do in the future doesn't get us anywhere.

Do you really think this republican party would hesitate to change the filibuster rules if the democrats (had the spine to) obstruct the way the republicans do now? Changing the rules mid-stream is right in their wheelhouse.

Furthermore, there is no better way to hang onto and increase Senate seats than to push for and pass progressive legislation regardless of what the House does or the White House wants. If Democrats really started acting like Democrats there would be an explosion of support from the base. And we already know our base is bigger than theirs, and growing everyday.

[bigtree]

45. casting this as fear is absurd

the next criticism of Democrats, if republicans gain power in tow years, would be, why aren't they doing anything to stop them? Isn't there SOMETHING they can do?

The fantasy that Democrats will, all of the sudden, vote in lockstep and win over voters with some ultra-progressive agenda is a dangerous delusion.

[truebluegreen]

46. Soooo your solution is.....what?

Hoping for the best?

Anyway, wasn't talking about an ultra-progressive agenda. Was talking about more-progressive-than-bat-shit-crazy agenda. Was talking about passing bills that would actually do some good for the American people as a whole--even if the "good" for right now is only visual, because of course we know the pukes won't pass anything reasonable in the House.

Was talking about showing that there is an actual difference between the parties--assuming that's true on issues other than social ones--and letting the voters see that there is a reason to get out and vote.

Because we know we win when we vote.

Or....we could do what, exactly?

[bigtree]

48. I like the idea of a progressive agenda

I'm just wondering where it's supposed to come from. We have a slightly more progressive Senate Democratic membership, but they are still going to be hobbled by that handful of conservative Democrats. Even on this filibuster initiative of Reid's, we couldn't manage 51 stinking votes for a talking filibuster.

But, look, I'm more inclined to trust the fellow in the Senate who knows what tools he needs to protect Democratic interests against the potential or reality of a republican majority; and, he also knows what he needs to advance our interests right now. He's also got to keep a lid on any backlash from overreach; right now and in some future republican majority.

So, there's balance and there's strategy. We'll see where it all leads.

[truebluegreen]

49. Yeah, I guess we have to wait and see.

But I'm tired of waiting for our position to improve, or a better crop of legislators, or a better President or whatever.

I think the whole system is corrupt and if can't even take baby steps to improve itself while Rome burns.....<sigh> Sorry if I've offended in any way, but I'm not well and these things can get me down. It seems to me our country and our world have been in a downward spiral since the 60s and every time there's one step forward it is followed by two steps back.

[woo me with science]

21. Let's talk about collusion between corporatists in both parties,

because that is what really happened here. In fact, that is the core of our problem: that corporatists now infest our party, too, and not just the other one.

Republicans have long served corporate interests. What has changed is that too many Democrats, long the ONLY ones standing between the people and predatory corporate policies, are now purchased too, and our party is colluding with Republicans on behalf of the one percent who purchase them.

Ever single Democrat should be outraged and take as a wake-up call what happened with filibuster reform. This was not just another betrayal. This was a laying bare of the depth of the complicity and corruption we face. It was a move that ensures the ability of our party to continue to *claim* to support progressive policies, but that ensures the voting conditions necessary to prevent any real change in that direction.

It was a move that sets the stage for an entire second term of continued betrayals.

It's time to address the real problem. We are in serious trouble in this country, because our government has been hijacked/purchased, and is working for the interests of the few. The corporatists in the two parties win, over and over again, by keeping us divided and hating each other, rather than realizing that they are working quietly together, behind the scenes, to enact an agenda that they both want, that is predatory to all of us. It's time to recognize that the real problem is systemic, rooted in corporate money, and persists administration to administration regardless of party.

[Raksha]

47. Exactly - and that was the whole point of it.

Re "It was a move that sets the stage for an entire second term of continued betrayals."

I see the corruption and complicity of the Democrats as a much bigger problem than the regressive bigotry and mean-spiritedness of the Republicans, because they still pretend to be on the side of the 99 per cent. That pretense grows more hollow by the day.

[AndyTiedye]

14. Our Chances of Holding the Senate in 2014 Continue to Dwindle

How can we defend so many open seats?

[George II]

25. People said that last year....look what happened.

[Fuddnik]

15. Now, say hello to Senator Stephen King.

(R) Dickhead.

[libinnyandia]

28. Steve King is just as wacky as Aikins and Mourdock. I don't think he can win

statewide.

[gtar100]

16. Reid had a chance to redeem himself, and it looked like he almost would.

But for me, his lack of courage on the filibuster rule is the last straw. I've lost my respect for him. Unless he's got something up his sleeve (or something on McConnell), he's set us up for more ineffectiveness and minority rule by the republicans for years to come. Who needs republicans when you have democrats like Reid. I'm sure in his own mind he's justified himself. But he doesn't have to live with the pain end of what comes out of our congress.

[plethoro]

20. Now, four more years of fight after fight after fight, for nothing.......nft

ddddddddd

[George II]

23. I guess you didn't hear his reasons for retiring.....has NOTHING to do with that!!

[uponit7771]

26. +1

[woo me with science]

29. I suspect you are right,

at least about his feelings.

Our party is very sick right now, as is our government. It's got to be difficult to leave on this note.

[4dsc]

30. Harkin lacked backbone just like Reid

Harkin had a chance to block a couple of rightwing Supreme Count nominees and did nothing.

[Overseas]

31. I can imagine that he might have been inspired to stay if those 7 Democratic traitors hadn't caved.

If all the Democratic Senators had stood together for the talking filibuster, I can imagine Harkin wanting to be a part of the positive change they could bring about.

Seeing any of them pretend that giving in to Mitch would bring anything but more and more obstruction was probably enough to make it easy to proceed with his plans to retire.

[question everything]

32. He was first elected in 1984

I know. I voted for him.

He is the oldest "Junior" senator and I can imagine he's had enough.

It would be nice if more senators decided to retire once they reach a certain age. Look at Arlene Specter. They don't have to die in office and then throw their states into turmoil. Some will be replaced by appointees, some will result in special elections (at taxpayers expense, of course).

Now, if Grassley will follow through..

[JDPriestly]

33. Reid should allow himself to be replaced as Senate Majority Leader.

He really messed up on the filibuster rule.

[kestrel91316]

34. I find myself wondering more and more about Harry.

I am not completely convinced he is one of the good guys.

[NeeDeep]

35. Losing sight of what it (democracy) means

It means rule by the people....Reid. If you know the issues, as Reid does, you should at least put it up for a vote, which he didn't, and get it on the record. That's the problem, the republicans in the senate have assumed office and never have to vote anymore. They are not on the record for their betrayal, and can avoid those 'embarrassing' (if they can feel that emotion) commercials when election time rolls around. The Democrats have gotten the idea too, my how the sand-trap has deepened. Being on the record and standing for the betterment of America, whether right or wrong has been supplanted with covering your ass and taking a check from the tax payer, with benefits, for a career, for life. What a sad-ass situation, just one more shit-for-brains situation we can thank the republicans for! Quality public servants are being run-out-of-office and replaced by body-snatchers!

[AndyTiedye]

36. It Could be the Other Way Around

Perhaps Reid caved on the filibuster because he knew about Harkins' pending retirement.
That pretty much ensures that the Rapeuglicans take over the Senate in two years.
We have too many open seats to defend now.

[longship]

38. Oh dear! What shall we do?

[bluestate10]

40. The hand wringing and whining is getting to me too.

I guess there is not choice but to sit and wait for republicans to take over. Going into red states and figuring out how to make them less red is a waste of time if one buy what some DU posters are writing. Fielding candidates that can win in red states is a waste of time because those candidates are going to be blue-dogs, egad, god help us that a democrat that is still a democrat even though he or she could vastly more easily be a republican in his or her state, wins and support most of what we value with his or her votes.

[longship]

42. And Howard Dean's 50 state strategy was a scam <sarcasm>

I certainly hope that the DNC chair in 2014 knows that the way to win Congress for President Obama is to compete in every state, every district. When we last did it we won a congressional seat in freaking Kansas.

Step by step. But we have to let the Republicans know that no seat is safe.

The DNC chair should be talking to Howard Dean. Fuck! The DNC chair should be Howard Dean.