GOP senators may take a page from the Democrats’ playbook and filibuster the normally routine procedural vote that determines committee chairmanships. The tactic is meant to protect against the possibility, as it did for the Dems after the 2000 election, that Republicans might regain a majority in the Senate.
Concerns over the health of South Dakota Sen. Tim Johnson raised the chance that Republicans could capture the Senate, and if they do they want to make sure they’ll be allowed to reassign chairmanships that would otherwise remain locked regardless of a power shift.
Time:
The incapacitation of South Dakota Senator Tim Johnson has put all eyes in Washington on what is normally a little-noticed Senate vote now scheduled for Jan. 4. It is called the “organizing resolution,” and is the bit of internal housekeeping that determines how committee memberships will be allotted between the two parties, as well as who will get to serve as chairman and ranking members of each of the panels. These resolutions traditionally stand until the next Congress, even if the makeup of the chamber shifts to put the other party in the majority, which is why precedent would seem to dictate that the Chamber would stay in Democratic hands, even if Johnson is replaced by a Republican.
But don’t count on it this time. Incoming majority leader Harry Reid insisted at a press conference that “there isn’t a thing that’s changed” as a result of Johnson’s illness. But a family friend told time.com Thursday morning that Johnson’s prognosis is unclear, adding: “The next 24 hours will be crucial.”
Even if Johnson ultimately recovers from the congenital blood disorder known as arteriovenous malformation, which required emergency surgery Wednesday night, it now looks highly unlikely that he will healthy by Jan. 4. With Johnson unable to vote, Democrats still have enough to prevail, with 50 votes (including the two independent Senators, Joe Lieberman of Connecticut and Bernie Sanders of Vermont) to 49 for the Republicans. But Democrats now fear the real possibility that Republicans will filibuster that resolution. They could insist—just as the Democrats did after the 2000 election that left the chamber evenly split, with Vice President Dick Cheney as the tie-breaker—on an “out clause” that stipulates that control of the chamber goes to them if they somehow manage to achieve a majority during the course of the session. As both sides remember, that clause came in handy for the Democrats a few months later, when Vermont’s Jim Jeffords abruptly declared himself an independent and gave the Democrats a one-vote majority.
If you have trouble leaving a comment, review this help page. Still having problems? Let us know. If you find yourself moderated, take a moment to review our comment policy.
By Skruff, December 17, 2006 at 5:01 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)
R’s D’s Who cares. Crooks are crooks no matter which party they call home. Clinton, Bush Bush Reagan, Carter,Ford, Nixon, Johnson, they all lied. got American Men and women killed to preserve Walmarts right to hire illegals, and build new factories in China, instead of working for US citizens.
So send another 8 Bill to Israel, prop up another right wing dictator, stick nose into business of other countries, and let the boys and girls on Worcester’s south side slide further down the hill into abject poverty.
By DennisD, December 16, 2006 at 1:33 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)
It’s all one party anyway so what’s the difference. When we the American people gain control of our own government we can celebrate.
In the meantime the lines have become so blurred between the two parties I have to wait to see which one Paris or Britney is attending to tell them apart.
By Allen Thomas, December 16, 2006 at 11:22 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)
all this is getting to be a horror story as we see the antics of the monsters who will do anything and everything to hold on to power. I used to hope during the Clinton impeachment debacle that the Constitution would ultimately save the Country. No I have real doubts.
By SuGee, December 15, 2006 at 4:43 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)
This is really bad news. But the Democracts wouldn’t have done anything anyway. It is just that we’re suffering from the corporate takeover of our governemnt. It doesn’t matter what the label is, either. I used to think that the citizens of our country could determine what happens. But after 2000 and 2004, when it is clear that both elections were stolen and we get a criminal for president, then it is just so sad.
Marching in Chicago: Resisting Rahm Emanuel’s Neoliberal Savagery
Email 
Print
Share
Email to a friend
Newsletter 
Like Us
Follow Us
Get Our Feed
By Skruff, December 17, 2006 at 5:01 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)
R’s D’s Who cares. Crooks are crooks no matter which party they call home. Clinton, Bush Bush Reagan, Carter,Ford, Nixon, Johnson, they all lied. got American Men and women killed to preserve Walmarts right to hire illegals, and build new factories in China, instead of working for US citizens.
So send another 8 Bill to Israel, prop up another right wing dictator, stick nose into business of other countries, and let the boys and girls on Worcester’s south side slide further down the hill into abject poverty.
A pox on both their houses!
Report thisBy DennisD, December 16, 2006 at 1:33 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)
It’s all one party anyway so what’s the difference. When we the American people gain control of our own government we can celebrate.
Report thisIn the meantime the lines have become so blurred between the two parties I have to wait to see which one Paris or Britney is attending to tell them apart.
By Allen Thomas, December 16, 2006 at 11:22 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)
all this is getting to be a horror story as we see the antics of the monsters who will do anything and everything to hold on to power. I used to hope during the Clinton impeachment debacle that the Constitution would ultimately save the Country. No I have real doubts.
Report thisBy Quy Tran, December 15, 2006 at 7:15 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)
Political game is always dirty.
Report thisBy SuGee, December 15, 2006 at 4:43 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)
This is really bad news. But the Democracts wouldn’t have done anything anyway. It is just that we’re suffering from the corporate takeover of our governemnt. It doesn’t matter what the label is, either. I used to think that the citizens of our country could determine what happens. But after 2000 and 2004, when it is clear that both elections were stolen and we get a criminal for president, then it is just so sad.
Report this