Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

fiorello

(182 posts)
Thu Apr 28, 2011, 02:41 PM Apr 2011

What Obama accomplished - and what he would have accomplished without the filibuster

Maybe the best summary of what was and, more important, what might have been. See the last paragraph!

The hundred and eleventh Congress... ended... with unwonted vigor and speed. In the six days from December 17th until December 22nd, it sent President Obama a barrage of bills, including, in chronological order, a huge tax-cuts-and-unemployment-relief compromise package; the repeal of the dishonorable “Don’t ask, don’t tell” law; a substantial strengthening of the government’s ability to keep contaminants like E. coli out of our food; the ratification of the New START treaty with Russia; and health-care coverage for 9/11 first responders sickened by their service at Ground Zero.

Before that astonishing last-minute flurry, Obama and the 111th had already racked up a legislative score that put them in a league with Woodrow Wilson, Lyndon Johnson, and the two Roosevelts. The pre-midterm accomplishments included a stimulus that pulled the country back from the brink of a second Great Depression, the Code Blue rescue of the American automobile industry, firmer regulation of the financial industry, and, of course, comprehensive health-care reform.

Good. But not good enough....

Some on the liberal side have blamed these shortcomings—and the midterm electoral debacle—on the President and the Democratic leaders of Congress, who have certainly made their share of mistakes... But there’s one big obstacle— filibuster.

In the absence of the filibuster, the health-care law would offer a public alternative to private insurance, the financial reform would be strong enough to close off the likelihood of another meltdown, and the very rich (and their heirs) would pay something closer to their fair share of taxes. Nearly two hundred qualified nominees for executive and judicial offices would be on the job instead of in limbo. And a climate-and-energy bill, a bill to require corporations to be open about their political spending, the DREAM Act, and dozens of other worthy measures—all of which passed the House and had majority support in the Senate—would now be the law of the land.

http://www.newyorker.com/talk/comment/2011/01/10/110110taco_talk_hertzberg

So please, everyone: in all the frustration over missed opportunities, etc.: remember what Obama and a MAJORITY of the democrats actively supported in 2009-2010 Good... not good enough... but support the people who at the very least tried and pushed in the right direction!

3 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
What Obama accomplished - and what he would have accomplished without the filibuster (Original Post) fiorello Apr 2011 OP
congress was his hold up whathappened Apr 2011 #1
I have to wonder what he could have accomplished if DEMS had called the GOP's BLUFFon the filibuster Dr Fate Apr 2011 #2
I couldn't have said it much better. obxhead May 2011 #3

whathappened

(1,525 posts)
1. congress was his hold up
Thu Apr 28, 2011, 02:41 PM
Apr 2011

the dems did'nt have the steam to make the rep go to the mat on these bills , when the repubs had the majority ,they pushed and shoved there way tru , our side would'nt do it , they had some sort of idea , lets all be freinds

Dr Fate

(32,189 posts)
2. I have to wonder what he could have accomplished if DEMS had called the GOP's BLUFFon the filibuster
Thu Apr 28, 2011, 02:41 PM
Apr 2011

As opposed to using the filibuster that never was as an excuse for the falied agenda that never was.

Not to mention that the filibuster would not even be an issue, if not for the conservat...errr, I mean "centrist" Democrats who Obama either secretly agreed with, or was unable to lead.

Seems to me that if we are not willling to call the GOP & conseva...err, I mean "centrist" DEM bluffs as to the filibuster, then the filibuster is just another excuse for letting the GOP & conservat...errr, I mean "centrist" DEMS have their way. As usual.

Seems to me that the DEMS used/are using/will continue to use the specter of a GOP filibuster as an excuse, as opposed to the GOP actually being made to have one.

Not buying it. If "the filibuster" is our excuse, then I would have needed to have SEEN an actual filibuster. Seems like all I've seen is DEMS telling us to "compromise" w/o a fight b/c the GOP might threaten one.

 

obxhead

(8,434 posts)
3. I couldn't have said it much better.
Tue May 17, 2011, 02:04 PM
May 2011

When the Republicans/Blue Dogs actually USE a filibuster it might become a valid argument.

Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Editorials & Other Articles»What Obama accomplished -...