|
|
May 23, 2013
|
|
The Republican to See Suddenly Won’t DealPosted on Apr 28, 2010By Ruth Marcus It isn’t easy being a caucus of one. Sometimes you don’t even agree with yourself. Just last month, South Carolina Republican Sen. Lindsey Graham—the Senate Democrats’ indispensable man on immigration reform—was insisting that President Obama “step it up” on immigration if he hoped to see results. Just last weekend, Graham—the Senate Democrats’ indispensable man on climate change—pulled the plug on an about-to-be unveiled bipartisan energy bill because, he said, there was too much focus on immigration. Graham denounced the “hurried, panicked” shift to immigration as “a cynical political ploy.” By Monday night, he was demanding assurances from Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid that immigration be tabled for the year. Perhaps not coincidentally, Reid is in a tough re-election race in a state with a large, and so far largely unmotivated, Hispanic population. Advertisement Perhaps not coincidentally, Graham’s closest friend in the Senate, John McCain of Arizona, is in a tough re-election race in a state with a large number of illegal immigrants, a noxious new immigration law—and a primary opponent flaying McCain for his previous squishiness on the topic. You could understand why Graham might want to spare recovering maverick McCain from an immigration debate. And you could understand why Graham, censured by three chapters of the South Carolina Republican Party for fraternizing with Democrats, might want to ease some of the heat he’s been taking for pushing “Grahamnesty.” Graham—until recently, anyway—has reveled in his role as the Republican Man to See: breaking ranks to be the only Republican on the Senate Judiciary Committee to back Supreme Court nominee Sonia Sotomayor; negotiating with John Kerry and Joe Lieberman on climate change; dickering with Chuck Schumer on immigration; horse-trading with Rahm Emanuel on closing Guantánamo and trying terrorist detainees. So far Graham has managed to carve out political space for this admirable unorthodoxy, sacrificing some support among his state’s Republican base but making it up by attracting independent and Democratic voters. The disturbing question is whether this remains a safe path in a tea-party era when political line-crossers such as Florida Gov. Charlie Crist are endangered and even stalwart conservatives such as Utah Sen. Robert Bennett have to worry about primary challenges from the right. In South Carolina, the attacks on Graham have gotten increasingly ugly. Graham “has shown incredible courage,” a senior administration official told me before the recent eruption. “He has willingly taken on party orthodoxy at his own political peril. Thank God he’s not up until 2014.” Given the risks he’s taken and the time he’s put in on climate change, Graham’s frustration is understandable. His political analysis—that the new focus on immigration reform has more to do with electoral politics than any realistic hope of getting legislation passed—is spot on. Immigration reform is hard even with extensive groundwork; this is why the president—at Graham’s behest—has been phoning around in an effort to find a second Republican willing to join the cause. Forcing senators to take a pre-election stunt vote risks hardening positions for the future. Climate change is hardly easier, but the moment, at least, is riper, with an unlikely array of backers ranging from business to the Christian Coalition to environmental groups. Nonetheless, there was something outsized about Graham’s dramatic public pullout. Immigration wasn’t about to leapfrog ahead of climate change on the Senate floor; there’s no bill ready to move. Was Graham shielding McCain? Was he looking for an excuse—in the wake of accusations that the measure would include a “gas tax”—to get out of the climate debate? Was it just getting too uncomfortable being “a caucus unto himself,” as an administration official described Graham? I hope the weekend’s flare-up is a minor rift, quickly mended. Because the Senate badly needs more people with Graham’s combination of energy, pragmatism and courage. A Senate without a Graham in the fray would be even more dysfunctional. Which is saying something. Ruth Marcus’ e-mail address is marcusr(at symbol)washpost.com. © 2010, Washington Post Writers Group New and Improved CommentsIf 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 MarthaA, May 1, 2010 at 6:11 pm Link to this comment
Immigration reform of the aborigines of the Southwest United States, that was Mexico prior to the United States’ Manifest Destiny, is not really going to happen, EVER. It is all an election campaign oppressive gimmick, because a capitalist government will never go against commerce; otherwise, if this was a socialist government, the solution would be to tax all the companies and corporations hiring undocumented workers so high that it would not be feasible to hire undocumented workers and all the undocumented workers would have to go home, but that will never happen in a capitalist government. This oppressive theater of legal tyranny of arresting and getting rid of all the undocumented workers is just that, oppressive theater. The United States is a capitalist country and the capitalist government, as I said before, will never go against the corporations and the companies hiring these workers. All that will happen will be that the poor, undocumented workers will be further mistreated and exploited by these various corporations and companies needing their cheap labor. Anyone who thinks differently, just doesn’t understand commerce.
Report thisBy thenine9, April 30, 2010 at 6:42 pm Link to this comment
Maybe Senator Reid and others are just as outraged by what’s happening in Arizona as the rest of us. Like Gov. Arnold says, “there are elections every two years” so get Immigration Reform done now!
Report thisBy MarthaA, April 28, 2010 at 8:41 pm Link to this comment
Democrats represent the academic “new money” culture, and Republicans represent the elite GOP “old money” culture of which neither the “new money academics” nor the populace can be a part. The Republican Party represents “old money” the elite and well born, and corporate power, while the Democratic Party represents the academics of the populace——there’s a big difference. The Democratic Party are toadies to power, while the Republican Party is power.
It is imperative that the populace withdraw from the Republican Party because the Republican Party does not represent the populace and never will ever represent the populace. The Democratic Party is the Left and can be made to represent the Left by the Left, because they are the Left, but the Republican Party is the Right and will never represent the populace, which is the Left. It’s wishful thinking for members of the populace to be Republicans thinking they are going to get benefit somehow from Republicans, it will never happen.
Report thisBy SimonSays, April 28, 2010 at 5:46 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)
Yesterday, a key hearing took place in the Senate. Sen. Levine got the Goldman Sachs execs to essentially lay bare at least one of the ways they got rich by fraudulently inflating a housing bubble, then ‘shorting’ against it to provide from the crash while exacerbating it.
After two years, finally a hearing on the wall street fraud that cost Americans trillions.
After reading Mike Whitney’s excellent article on this hearing, I starting looking around to see who was covering it and who was not.
CNN’s front page was filled with their favorite faux-issue. Illegal aliens and immigration reform.
Now I see that the WaPo Democrat propaganda spin machine (aka Ruth Marcus) is spinning the same issue to people’s attention. We sure can’t pay any attention to how wall street stole trillions and crashed the economy when we can talk about illegal aliens instead.
Go around the web today. Which websites are talking about the Goldman Sachs hearings in the Senate? Which websites want to talk about immigration reform instead?
The websites that try to tell you just how wall street got rich while stealing the equity in Americans homes and then deliberately crashed the market to make even more money are the websites you should be getting your news from.
Report thisBy ShadowWorld, April 28, 2010 at 5:39 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)
“The Republican to See Suddenly Won’t Deal”
Is that even English? If I’d written that sentence in high school, it would have come back circled in red and with a big red F next to it from my english teacher.
————————
All politicians have spines. You can see them anytime the policies that favor the rich and powerful are threatened. Doesnt’ matter if they are Republicans or Democrat, they are all weak and spineless when it comes to the good of the people, and they are all powerful dinosaurs with sharp spikes on their tough spines if anyone dares to try to take your money back from the rich.
If you vote either Democrat or Republican, you get the same thing.
Report thisBy MarthaA, April 28, 2010 at 4:52 pm Link to this comment
Graham has a spine for who he represents, which is not the populace.
Report thisBy Jimnp72, April 28, 2010 at 6:05 am Link to this comment
wow. a republican with a spine. he should become a dem as he will be widely
Report thisdespised by his fellow repubs now.