The seniority system should not exist.
The seniority system is a corrupt holdover of days where political bosses had absolute power over the political process. It is undemocratic and leads to highly inappropriate people rising to positions of power. If you think it is a Democratic Party problem, remember that the Goppers follow seniority even more slavishly.
In our current political and economic context, it is even worse. The longer people are in politics, the more immersed they tend to be in the culture of wealthy and corporate corruption. In the Senate, seniority is followed more than in the House, and the Senate is so backward in so many other ways that seniority only adds to the intellectual and ethical rot.
Yet, the real issue on the question is being ignored by the corporate media who think that wealthy and powerful connections should always trump merit.
Orcinus has an excellent posting on the motives for the GOP trying to delay the nomination of Labor Secretary nominee Hilda Solis. The posting does an excellent job of addressing the merits of Ms. Solis, who certainly should be confirmed.
What I would like to focus on is the tactic being used to prevent her confirmation: anonymous holds. From the Pasadena Star News article referenced in Orcinus.
Democrats have announced that a Republican senator is using a parliamentary procedure to delay Solis' confirmation, the Washington paper Congress Daily reported Friday.
The anonymous hold - as the tactic is known - was placed because of Solis' support for "card check" legislation aimed at facilitating union organization and another bill regarding pay-discrimination, and for non-responsive answers during her confirmation hearing, according to GOP aides, the paper reported.
They also provide a description of the anonymous hold.
A senatorial hold is an informal practice that allows a single senator to anonymously delay a vote on a nomination or bill by telling Senate leadership of his or her opposition, and potential to filibuster efforts to move the legislation or nomination forward. The hold can, technically, be overridden by a vote of 60 senators, like any filibuster. However, such votes are rare as the senatorial hold is considered one of the prerogatives of each senator.
Setting aside the question of why only one Senator can block a nomination, there is an aspect of this that is so blatantly corrupt, it deserves discussion and condemnation.
There is no legitimate reason for these holds to be anonymous.
The Senate belongs to the American people, not just the Senators. The Senators work for the American people, not the other way around. Nominations for cabinet level agencies are the public's business. Conducting the process in a secretive fashion violates our right to know what is going on in our own Senate. Keeping legitimately classified information secret on national security grounds is one thing. But, engaging in a cover up on a matter that should be subject to the utmost public scrutiny is another.
This practice shows that the Senate considers the voters to be lower than the scum they scrape off of their shoes. There needs to be a major ethics push in Washington to clear out all of this corrupt nonsense.
One lesson that people should learn from recent history (and from the distant past) is that we cannot rely on politicians to bring about real change in this country. If we want things to get better, the people are going to have to fight for it. Here are a few examples of things you can do to fight for real change.
Support the Unplanned Pregnancy Prevention Bill
The National Partnership for Women and Families has an online petition in favor of the Unplanned Pregnancy Prevention Bill. Here is their description.
The measure's goals are lofty – to tackle the unacceptably high rate of unplanned pregnancies in the U.S. Currently, half of pregnancies are unintended and half of those end in abortion. The bill would tackle the problem from several angles, by:
* Increasing family planning funding,
* Ending insurance discrimination against women,
* Improving awareness about emergency contraception, and
* Requiring programs to focus on medically accurate sex education.
The latter is an incredibly important AIDS issue as well. "Abstinence only" scams promote the spread of HIV just as they promote unplanned pregnancies. They all fit in with the fundamentalist desire to punish unsanctioned sexuality, especially among women.
Sign the Petition
Support Domestic Partnership Benefits for State Department Employees
From an American Humanist Association email Action Alert
Send a letter to Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton urging her to extend equal benefits to the same-sex partners of foreign policy workers.
There are a range of benefits and rights granted to the spouses of State Department staff but which are denied to gay or lesbian partners. For example, same-sex partners are denied paid travel to and from overseas posts, visas and diplomatic passports, and mail privileges. Worse yet, they are even deprived of evacuation in case of a security emergency or medical necessity.
This is unacceptable. Gay and lesbian foreign policy workers shouldn't have to choose between their families and service to their country. It's absurd that the State Department will reimburse the cost of transporting a pet overseas but won't do likewise for a same-sex partner.
Many other nations already extend a partnership benefit. It's time that the United States caught up with the times. Write to Clinton today and urge her to ensure that equal benefits are extended to all foreign-policy couples.
My only disagreement is that I think that the State Department should provide domestic partnerships regardless of the gender(s) of the partners.
The AHA is suggesting that people write Sec. Clinton at the State Department.
Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton
U.S. Department of State
2201 C Street NW
Washington, DC 20520
You may also wish to go to the questions/comments page for the State Department. If you do so, you have my permission to giggle at the wildly inappropriate items placed on the final confirmation page under "The answers to the following questions may be relevant to your question: ."
Oppose Hate Based Initiatives in the Stimulus Plan
The term "faith based initiatives" should be replaced by "hate based initiatives." Such diversions of government funding from inclusive charities to religious ones discriminates against atheists, and the whole scam is justified on the bigoted and silly notion that being religious makes people morally superior. Such initiatives also violate state/church separation. Americans United for Separation of Church and State is opposing the latest hate based legislation on Establishment Clause grounds in their Action Alert.
Protect Church-State Separation in the Stimulus Package!
Urge the Senate to keep funding for the Compassion Capital Fund out
The House recently passed its version of the economic stimulus package, which would provide funding for many services designed to relieve Americans from the burdens of our current economic crisis. Throughout this process, the staff of Americans United has engaged our many allies in Congress to ensure that this bill, which provides $819 billion dollars of funding, does not disrupt the important separation of church and state or diminish important religious liberty or civil rights protections that we hold dear.
We applaud the drafters of the House bill for their wise prohibition on the funding of private or religious schools. This is consistent with the Constitution and an important safeguard to place on the expenditure of our tax dollars. We are disappointed, however, that the House economic recovery package contains funding for the Compassion Capital Fund. The Compassion Capital Fund has a myriad of Constitutional problems. The Fund lacks oversight, sends money directly to Houses of Worship, and allows recipients to hire employees based solely upon their religion for government-funded jobs. Clearly, more taxpayer dollars should not be expended on this program.
Fortunately, the Senate version of the bill does not contain unwise funding for the Compassion Capital Fund - and we need it to stay that way! Please thank your Senators for eliminating this funding stream and urge them to use our tax dollars wisely in this important time. As we all know, now is not the time to continue unwise and unconstitutional practices of the Bush Administration. Please enter your information below to urge your Senator to maintain the ban on funding religious schools and the elimination of funding for the Compassion Capital Fund. With your help, we can ensure that the separation of church and state is unharmed in the first major act of the 111th Congress.
Contact Your Senators!
This is fabulous.
Elizabeth Dole, a heterosexist bigot who made bigotry against freethinkers her main campaign theme, was just projected by MSNBC to lose her Senate seat.
My only complaint is that we aren't seeing anywhere near enough of Rachel Maddow on MSNBC.
The passage of the unconstitutional FISA legislation to expand federal wiretapping powers to political opponents and dissidents did not happen in a vacuum. There is a context that needs to be examined.
At a National Gay and Lesbian Task Force conference over a decade ago, Urvashi Vaid warned the audience of a "creeping fascism" and gave a series of examples and arguments to build her case. At the time, the idea seemed novel, but it merely registered in my mind as something to pay attention to in the future.
In 2008, the creep has gone quite far. Here are some examples:
- Restrictions of domestic political activity at the state and federal level under NAFTA and the GATT agreement that started the World Trade Organization. The unconstitutional nature of the agreements and their enforcement was a bad sign as well. (They function as treaties yet did not get the required 2/3 Senate vote treaties need.)
- Unconstitutional Warrantless wiretapping
- Roundups based on religious beliefs
- Illegal detentions without charges at Guantanamo Bay
- The Unpatriotic Act
- Kidnapping of uncharged, alleged terrorists and sending them to foreign countries to be tortured. ("extraordinary rendition")
- Routine use of torture
- Wars in Iraq and Afghanistan without the constitutionally mandated Declarations of War
- Executive branch "signing statements" which attempt to nullify laws they don't like (expanded dramatically under Bush)
- Hate based religious patronage systems which violate state/church separation, discriminate against atheists, and amount to incumbent administrations bribing preachers for political support
- Concentration of television and radio station license holders of frequencies owned by the American people, not the corporations that license them
- Supreme Court decisions falsely claiming that campaign contributions are "speech," undermining democracy and ceding greater powers to the wealthy and to corporations over the government.
- Restricting freedom of assembly through "free speech zones" and other means
I'm sure you can come up with more. The point is that when people don't raise enough hell over one attack on our freedoms as Americans, more follow. Things are moving in a terrible direction, and we should be less willing to accept it.
During the 18th - 20th centuries, the US was transitioning to a more representative democracy where constitutionally mandated civil liberties were gaining more respect. The nation went from a situation where only landowning white males had suffrage and the Bill of Rights was largely theoretical to a place where every adult had the right to vote and courts, legislators, the media, and the public were strongly defending our freedoms.
That is all being unraveled by money, power, and religious extremism.
As you probably know by now, the US Senate voted 69-28 to pass a FISA bill which gives immunity to Telecoms who illegally spied on Americans at the request of the Bush regime and which gives an attempted legal license to the unconstitutional spying of political opponents and dissidents.
Three votes are of particular interest to followers of Presidential politics. Obama voted in favor of this attack on the Constitution and on basic political freedoms; John "Keating Five" McCain didn't bother to vote; and Hillary Clinton actually voted against it, despite her earlier vote against a filibuster of the reprehensible legislation.
Much has been written on Obama's betrayal on this issue, despite previous promises to filibuster any bill with Telecom immunity. It raises serious questions not only about his commitment to constitutional rights, but also to his credibility and trustworthiness.
The lack of a vote by John McCain is interesting. Did age and frailty make it too difficult for "Keating Five" McCain to carry on his Senate duties while campaigning for the White House? Was he afraid that voting for the bill would alienate anti-government conservatives who might vote for Bob Barr?
Hillary Clinton's No vote was a rare break from the rightist wingnuttery which has typified her time in the Senate and her presidential campaign. Was she trying to take both sides of an issue to triangulate? Was she trying to move to the left to stay politically viable in New York? Her vote suggests that those of us in New York should see if this represents an opportunity to try to pull her away from her generally Republican behavior, admittedly an enormous task.
What about the rest of our not so esteemed Senate? There wasn't even one Republican honest enough to vote against the legislation, demonstrating how completely corrupt and unAmerican that party has become. The votes of 20 "Democrats" for the bill shows that corruption has made enormous inroads in that party. Webb's vote for the bill, along with his pro-war record (as opposed to anti-war rhetoric) shows the folly of trusting a former Reagan administration official.
Here is the vote tally from the US Senate Website:
| Yes ---69 Alexander (R-TN) Allard (R-CO) Barrasso (R-WY) Baucus (D-MT) Bayh (D-IN) Bennett (R-UT) Bond (R-MO) Brownback (R-KS) Bunning (R-KY) Burr (R-NC) Carper (D-DE) Casey (D-PA) Chambliss (R-GA) Coburn (R-OK) Cochran (R-MS) Coleman (R-MN) Collins (R-ME) Conrad (D-ND) Corker (R-TN) Cornyn (R-TX) Craig (R-ID) Crapo (R-ID) DeMint (R-SC) Dole (R-NC) Domenici (R-NM) Ensign (R-NV) Enzi (R-WY) Feinstein (D-CA) Graham (R-SC) Grassley (R-IA) Gregg (R-NH) Hagel (R-NE) Hatch (R-UT) Hutchison (R-TX) Inhofe (R-OK) | Inouye (D-HI) Isakson (R-GA) Johnson (D-SD) Kohl (D-WI) Kyl (R-AZ) Landrieu (D-LA) Lieberman (ID-CT) Lincoln (D-AR) Lugar (R-IN) Martinez (R-FL) McCaskill (D-MO) McConnell (R-KY) Mikulski (D-MD) Murkowski (R-AK) Nelson (D-FL) Nelson (D-NE) Obama (D-IL) Pryor (D-AR) Roberts (R-KS) Rockefeller (D-WV) Salazar (D-CO) Shelby (R-AL) Smith (R-OR) Snowe (R-ME) Specter (R-PA) Stevens (R-AK) Sununu (R-NH) Thune (R-SD) Vitter (R-LA) Voinovich (R-OH) Warner (R-VA) Webb (D-VA) Whitehouse (D-RI) Wicker (R-MS) |
| No ---28 Akaka (D-HI) Biden (D-DE) Bingaman (D-NM) Boxer (D-CA) Brown (D-OH) Byrd (D-WV) Cantwell (D-WA) Cardin (D-MD) Clinton (D-NY) Dodd (D-CT) Dorgan (D-ND) Durbin (D-IL) Feingold (D-WI) | Harkin (D-IA) Kerry (D-MA) Klobuchar (D-MN) Lautenberg (D-NJ) Leahy (D-VT) Levin (D-MI) Menendez (D-NJ) Murray (D-WA) Reed (D-RI) Reid (D-NV) Sanders (I-VT) Schumer (D-NY) Stabenow (D-MI) Tester (D-MT) Wyden (D-OR) |
| Not Voting - 3 Kennedy (D-MA) McCain (R-AZ) Sessions (R-AL) | |
Those schmucks in DC are at it again. Congress has another Iraq war funding bill which they actually are giving serious consideration to. It is important to remind our Senators who they represent, and that they need to stop voting for the slaughter in Iraq.
From a Peace Action West Action Alert:
Tell the Senate to Stop Funding the Occupation of Iraq
When the House voted on the supplemental last week, Republicans decided to protest the process the Democrats used by voting “present” on the funding. The good news is that more members of Congress than ever before took a real stand by voting against the funding, and it went down in flames. The bad news is that the Republicans felt comfortable letting the funding fail because they are confident that it will be added back in by the Senate.
The Senate is planning to vote on the funding early this week. Help stop another blank check by writing to your senators today.
Take Action!
Phonycrats like Carl Levin are particularly galling. They pretend to be against the war of occupation in Iraq, especially in their fundraising letters, yet they do everything in their power to make sure our tax money goes to fund it. They insult our intelligence, betray our country, and then demand campaign contributions.
Here is what I wrote on the donation sheet of a recent fundraising letter I received from "Friends of Senator Carl Levin."
Take me off your mailing list. I don't support politicians that fund the war in Iraq.
I even used the business reply mail envelope to make sure his campaign pays the postage.
What a jerk.
