About the only good thing to come out of this
election so far is that the Senate appears to be
splitting 50-50 with the horrendous anti-Indian
Gorton finally going down to defeat by Cantwell.
Of course the Repugs will maintain nominal
control irrespective of who wins the White House
because of VP shenanigans. But, with 50-50,
they will hopefully block anything too outrageous
coming out of Tom DeLay's House and backed
by Dubya. Of course the Dubya-DeLay dynamic
looks to be very interesting, again presuming
the likely outcome that Dubya prevails (and
prevaricates) in the end.
Barkley Rosser
-----Original Message-----
From: Nathan Newman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Sunday, November 26, 2000 12:56 PM
Subject: [PEN-L:4975] Re: Re: re: Weighing the Options- Union Gains under
Clinton-Gore
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Shane Mage" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
>Nathan. wrote on Nov. 25:
>"... on the pro-union side of the ledger:
>.... Support of the Striker Replacement bill (filibustered by GOP
>Senators)..."
>
>>His party controlled the Senate. He himself held the power
>>of the gavel as President of the Senate (his sole constitutional
>>responsibility).
>>But he capitulated to the mere threat of a filibuster. The *first* "stop"
>to
>>pull out would have been to hold the Senate in permanent 24/7
>>session--forcing the spectacle of a real filibuster (and giving the
country
>>the chance to see Lott, in character, playing the Bilbo role). And if
they
>>kept going after the collapse of Thurmond and a few others, mobilizing
the
>>power of the Presidency to demand, incessantly, 'Why are they holding up
>>all sorts of vital (sic) legislation just to keep the Senate from
>>*voting*?'! The whole 'striker replacement' charade... was nothing but a
>>fraud."
>
>A slightly bizarre argument, since the GOP Senators were proudly
>filibustering not only striker replacement, but campaign finance and every
>other Dem initiative in 1994. So the C-SPAN junkies could see a few 24/7
>sessions on TV; big woop. I know, I know - we've all seen Mr. Smith Goes
to
>Washington, so the heroic midnight marathon speechaton always captivates
the
>public's imagination. Maybe some different strategies in 1994 would have
>broken some of the GOP filibusters but the raw fact is that 40 Senators
have
>the ability to block any vote, without needing the drama of longwinded
>speeches.
>
>You can play all the blame games against the majority of Senators (almost
>all Dems) who supported striker replacement legislation, but it's just a
>convenient blinder to support the ideological line that there is no
>difference between the parties, despite the obvious list of differences on
>union issues I listed. A majority in the House backed by the Dem
leadership
>passed striker replacement, the Dem leadership and members supported it in
>the Senate, and a Dem President supported it, and it was a minority of GOP
>Senators that blocked it. That's the bottom-line reality and the
>bottom-line reality between the parties on union issues.
>
>The same was true in 1966 when a GOP Senate filibuster defeated labor law
>reform; the same was true in 1978 when a GOP filibuster defeated labor law
>reform; and the same was true in 1994.
>
>The Dems sell-out to corporate interests on a range of issues, but on basic
>labor law votes, the differences between the parties are large and, if
>anything, more dramatic today than in the past.
>
>-- Nathan Newman
>
>
>
>Shane Mage
>
>"Thunderbolt steers all things."
>
>
>Herakleitos of Ephesos, fr. 64
>
>
>
>
