PRINT
EMAIL
COMMENT
BUZZ UP
DIGGEXECUTIVE POLL
Bernard Madoff, convicted of running an $65 billion Ponzi scheme, was sentenced to 150 years in jail. What’s your take on his punishment?
OUR PREMIUM CONTENT
The Kiplinger Agriculture Letter
The Kiplinger California Letter
Kiplinger's Biofuels Market Alert
Kiplinger's Retirement Report
SUBSCRIBER HELP
CURRENT LETTER
Overhauling
Financial Regs
PREVIOUS ISSUES
Senator Mitch McConnell is a shoo-in to be the GOP’s most valuable player. Just two months into the congressional year, it’s clear that President Bush will leave office much in debt to McConnell, the skillful and unassuming Republican leader from Kentucky who is stopping a slew of Democratic bills from reaching the White House.
He’s already proving more than willing to just say no, using Senate procedural rules to prevent Democrats from passing their bills, whether it’s a resolution calling for a withdrawal of troops from Iraq next year, new efforts to rein in lobbyist influence or a freestanding minimum wage hike. He’s also a major obstacle to a host of other Democratic legislative priorities rushed through the House at the beginning of the year, including an oil industry subsidy rollback, an expanded stem cell research bill and a rewrite of the prescription drug benefits.
That will boost Bush’s legacy and, not by accident, help congressional Republicans in 2008. Because of McConnell, Democrats will have only moderate legislative success to point to when they ask voters for another term in power. Even budget bills on defense, entitlements and domestic spending will take much effort to squeeze through without changes made to appeal to McConnell.
What’s his secret? Democrats have only 51 votes, and they need at least 60 to pass any bill that Republicans choose to oppose, so as long as McConnell keeps most of his ranks together, he wins.
There’s an obvious risk in his tactics. He may be seen as an obstructionist, especially on Iraq policy, where a majority of Americans side with Democrats on views that Bush’s plan to put more U.S. troops in Baghdad won’t work and that a more clearly defined and timely exit strategy is needed.
So far, though, McConnell has been able to avoid the problem. When he blocked a vote on an Iraq resolution earlier this month, the media’s story line was one of “Democrats in Disarray,” not “Republicans as Obstacles.” And further delays in passing a straight war funding resolution will allow McConnell to portray Democrats as being obstructionists by delaying much needed war funding.
Before this year, McConnell, a four-term senator and lawyer from Louisville, KY., was best known for opposing the McCain-Feingold campaign finance legislation, which banned unregulated soft money donations to the parties. It passed in 2002, but only after nearly 10 years of McConnell skillfully working the levers of the Senate to delay and modify it.
His tactics also make McConnell a hero among the GOP faithful. He’s helping raise gobs of money for fellow Republicans in hopes that they’ll be back in the majority after the 2008 election.
For weekly updates on topics to improve your business decisionmaking, click here.
POSTED BY: Richard Sammon (March 26, 2007 11:21 AM)
Hello all: This is Richard Sammon, author of the article. Good to hear from you. Yes, McConnell will use every tool he has to act as a blocker for Bush. He'd be criticized mightily by conservatives if he did not. To be fair, Democrats used many of the same procedural delay tactics when they were in the minority, too. But, Ken, you make a good point. It makes you wonder about the concept of "majority rule" when the minority prevails. In the 1970s, 67 votes were needed to cut off a minority filibuster. Now it is 60. The lower number was supposed to end some of the gridlock. But any observer would agree it remains hard to pass anything even a little controversial as long as there is a determined minority.
POSTED BY: Kent Webb (March 26, 2007 02:03 PM)
It is in the interest of all workers that they do not lose their jobs. Raising the minimum wage without tax offsets likely will cost some jobs. A precipitous withdrawl from Iraq could destablilize the region causing much higher oil prices which will cost jobs. An effective higher cost of producing oil in the US will discourage drilling and thus decrease jobs as well as expand our trade deficit. In general, keeping the cost of government under control means a lower long term tax bill and less government borrowing which lowers the cost of capital in the private sector; all of which ultimately impacts on the number of jobs in America and what employers can pay.
A credible case can be made for almost all of these issues that McConnell is acting on behalf of the majority of Americans rather than narrow special interests. Can the democrats seriously say the same when they try to eliminate secret votes on union representation? Is that not more of an assualt on the rights and needes of lower and middle class workers?
POSTED BY: don jones (April 05, 2007 02:20 PM)
The Dems are banning free speech. See what the Dems in the House of Rep are doing. The House Armed Services Committee is banishing the global war on terror from the 2008 defense budget. This is not because the war has been won, lost or even called off, but because the committee’s Democratic leadership doesn’t like the phrase. A memo for the committee staff, circulated March 27, says the 2008 bill and its accompanying explanatory report that will set defense policy should be specific about military operations and “avoid using colloquialisms.” The “global war on terror,” a phrase first used by President Bush shortly after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks on the U.S., should not be used, according to the memo. Also banned is the phrase the “long war,” which military officials began using last year as a way of acknowledging that military operations against terrorist states and organizations would not be wrapped up in a few years. Our TAX Dollars at work against America!
E-Mail Article
Print Article
Reprint Article
