Michael Moore: Dems should push legislation already passed by the House asap

[polichick]

Very interesting idea about the lame duck session:

http://www.michaelmoore.com/words/mike-in-the-news/video-michael-moore-last-word

Are you listening, Senator Reid and President Obama?

[Oceansaway]

1. K&R...n/t

[Duer 157099]

2. And here is what's astonishing

They won't. They have no excuse, no elections to protect, nothing, no reason whatsoever.

And yet, they won't. Just watch.

[polichick]

3. If they refuse to use their power, they'll lose it. nt

[senseandsensibility]

8. I agree.

I thought exactly the same thing when I read the thread title. They won't.

[Fresh_Start]

4. Did they do any type of Sunshine bill?

Anything would be better than nothing.

[polichick]

5. Don't know what all is there but it's hundreds of bills...

There must be some goodies.

[spin]

6. Many Americans want bipartisanship ...

If we play the "take advantage of the lame duck session" game, it might totally destroy any cooperation between the Democrats and the Republicans. We will have another 2 years of gridlock in D.C.

The voters are already pissed and I hear a lot of people suggesting we throw all the bums out.

If the Republicans can paint us as not cooperating, we may see another tragic election in 2012 with the Republicans gaining control of the Presidency and both Houses. The little we gain by pushing some legislation through before the next congress could fuel anger that will hurt us in the long run.

In other words, it's simply bad Karma. Our party can welcome bipartisanship and when the Republicans stamp their feet and throw a temper tantrum because we won't let them have their way, the voters will turn on them. We could get Obama elected and gain back the House.

[polichick]

7. The Senate and Prez were elected to do their job - not sit on the sidelines...

...and let Republicans lead.

[spin]

11. Republicans will want to lead ...

and as I stated will throw a temper tantrum when they can't have their way.

If we have offered a fair compromise on the issues and they refuse, the voters will see Republicans as the party of "No".

In order to make headway in solving serious problems we have in the past found bipartisanship important.

Keith Poole, a professor at the University of California at San Diego who has created an index to measure partisanship in Congress, said bipartisanship is at its lowest point since the end of Reconstruction.

"What bipartisanship basically means is a broad cross-party coalition to pass a bill," he said. "The reason why you're having trouble with the definition is it doesn't happen anymore."

He blamed the disappearance of conservative Democrats, liberal Republicans and moderate lawmakers of all political stripes for the breakdown of bipartisanship in Washington. He noted that strong bipartisan support helped enact the Social Security program in 1935 and Medicare in 1965.

As a more recent example, he pointed to the 1983 deal between Republicans and Democrats to put the Social Security program on stronger financial footing.
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2010/mar/01/b-word-stymies-both-sides-of-the-aisle/?page=2

The voters want solutions not playground games. If in two years they don't see an honest effort, expect another punishing election. The voters were pissed at the Republicans in 2006 and 2008. This year they were angry with Democrats. Let's learn a lesson here. Let's not be the party the voters take out their anger on in 2012.

[polichick]

12. Playing nice is what got us here - voters want results, leadership. nt

[spin]

15. That's true, voters want results ...

If the unemployment rate continues, people keep losing their homes to foreclosure and states have to cut back on programs or go bankrupt, and all the Republicans and Democrats do is bicker and squabble like children in a playground - expect voter resentment to skyrocket.

[Lilyeye]

24. "disappearance of conservative Democrats, liberal Republicans"

We had plenty of conservative democrats, but not any liberal republicans.

[spin]

26. One big problem is the many of the conservative Democrats ...

were replaced by Republicans. While I favor bipartisanship, the fact is that the it is almost impossible to achieve without a good number of conservative Democrats and liberal Republicans.

I wonder about the possibility of a moderate third party evolving as a solution to the logjam we currently have in Congress.

[msongs]

9. "many people" does NOT equal republicans, only dems actually cave in nt

[JustAnotherGen]

10. But we didn't let them have their way

On Health Care Reform - and they still turned against us - instead of the Republicans.

[mzmolly]

14. We may get bipartisan support from some who are

leaving.

[Ken Burch]

17. No Republicans will EVER cooperate with Obama

To them "bipartisanship" just means(and ONLY means)"you have to do what WE want".

Bipartisanship will never exist again in this country. It's not worth trying for.

Half the reason we lost the House was that we refused to fight right-wing lies in our ad campaigns, because THAT would have
made it harder to be "bipartisan"(and as if the independents WANTED us to just surrender).

[spin]

20. You are probably right ...

and as I point out, if we offer them a fair chance to work together with us and they decide that it's their way or the highway, the voters might show them the door at the next election.

I believe that eventually bipartisanship will come back because the voters will just keep voting new people in until both parties stop playing games.

But there is also a good chance that the economy will start its overdue recovery and as the jobs return and people stop fearing becoming homeless and living on the street, the voters will lose their anger.

[denimgirly]

22. FAIL! Americans want Leadership not the 2-year failed bipartisanship gimmick

The problem was that Obama was (and still is) obsessed with bipartisanship even when repubs refuse to. Americans want decisive action.

[BlueMTexpat]

25. We've been down the "bipartisanship" road before and it's led nowhere.

At least, not in the universe that I inhabit. The Republicans will paint Dems as "not cooperating" no matter what Dems do. It's the nature of the political monstrosity that our two-party system has become.

So the Dems should use what time they have left to do something meaningful and the more they do, the better it will be for us all.

Will they? Probably not.

And so it goes.

[mzmolly]

13. Yep.

Perhaps a disgruntled R who lost along with the losing bluedogs, would help us break a filibuster?

[Thrill]

16. Yeah until That weasel Ben Nelson

Comes out and says "this is no way to govern, let the new Congress handle this business"
Face it. Our party isnt tough enough.

[Ken Burch]

19. If he does that, I want Russ Feingold to walk over and steal Nelson's toupee!

And set that dead chihuahua pelt on fire...right there live on C-Span.

[wiggs]

18. Do it. 420 bills, some important, are stuck. nt

[DemocraticPilgrim]

21. EXACTLY while they stil have the it they should ram it through like a locomoation to repair the US

[JCMach1]

23. the roll-over will continue in the lame-duck session... expect nothing

or worse, they will renew the Bush tax cuts.