Michael Barone takes note of the sudden outbreak of bipartisanship in Washington:
Like spring, bipartisanship is busting out all over. Even more so maybe: Washington in a time of alleged global warming is suffering through a chilly, wet springtime, but bipartisanship is sprouting up like gangbusters.
Exhibit A is the Corker-Cardin legislation, passed unanimously in the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, providing for limited congressional review of negotiations with Iran over its nuclear weapons program. Exhibit B is the legislation combating human trafficking, passed unanimously by the Senate last Wednesday. Exhibit C is the elimination of the annual “doc fix,” engineered by Speaker John Boehner and House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi.
He goes on to list other deals in the making in the greatest spurt of activity we’ve seen from the Congress in years. Mr. Barone, mistakenly I think, attributes the difference to the president’s lack of involvement in the proceedings.
The great movie, The Red Shoes, ends with the suicide of the prima ballerina. In her absence her ballet slippers are carried around the stage at the performance of the ballet on which she was working. The difference in Congress isn’t the absence of the president. It’s the change in Senate majority leadership.
When will it be recognized that Harry Reid was the worst Senate majority leader in living memory?
As I was reading your comment I was thinking (and then saw this)…..”
“Mr. Barone, mistakenly I think, attributes the difference to the president’s lack of involvement in the proceedings.” …………Harry Reid.
The only thing left to ponder then is whether he was acting to the displeasure, or at the behest, of the president. I’ve heard a rumor that this Obama guy is the most powerful person on earth.
A couple of reactions. First, I think it’s more than likely that Sen. Reid was acting on behalf of the president but not on his behest. As Dan Rostenkowski once put it, never take a bribe—just give ’em your business card.
Second, I think the most powerful person in the world probably is not the president. It’s probably the Senate majority leader.
I think it’s more than likely that Sen. Reid was acting on behalf of the president but not on his behest.
I think there is a very thin line between “behalf” and “behest.” In the case of Reid, it has long been interpreted that his actions as Senate Majority Leader were “tyrannical,” overtly demonstrated as to what he allowed to get through — basically nothing! The companion piece to his leadership was the president, who said nothing to change Reid’s behavior, even praising him at times, while he benefited from not having to use a veto pen which may have cast an unattractive political shadow over his legacy. It also gave the president a second advantage of being able to rail and sling aspersions at the republicans for any weak but obstructive resistance they tried to give Reid. It was like Obama was Reid’s opportunistic “wing man.”
Such a pattern of behavior by the WH’s top executive may not have technically contained an incriminating order to do something. However, the complicity shown, time and time again, of how he exploited and used Reid’s awful behavior for his own advantage, IMO, is the same as quietly “signing” a behest to the Senate Leader.
I think the most powerful person in the world probably is not the president. It’s probably the Senate majority leader.
Why?
The Senate majority leader has broad discretionary powers as to what legislation makes it to the floor. It’s essentially unlimited. The Senate majority leader has tenure limited only by his ability to be re-elected and his party’s ability to hold on to the majority . A Senate majority leader’s being ousted other than by becoming the Senate minority leader is extremely rare.
The majority leader has practically unchecked power over committee chairmanships and memberships. Add to that power over the party’s Senate re-election funds and it makes for tremendous leverage over the other Senators, particularly in his own party.
The Senate majority leader doesn’t have the large federal bureaucracy to deal with and there are very few checks on his budget or discretion.
There’s an argument to be made that the Speaker of the House is even more powerful but Speakers are ousted more frequently than Senate majority leaders.
Dave, does another Senate Majority Leader cross your mind who has shown such duplicitous behavior in order to provide legislative cover/support for their president’s face-saving agenda? Remember that Reid also breached the nuclear option line, in part so the president could have clear sailing to place like-minded judges in place in the DC court, where some controversial healthcare decisions were decided. It’s like the whole idea of balance of powers has become thwarted, and consequently destabilized, under the Obama/Reid extreme exercise of their powers.
As I say, I think Harry Reid was the worst Senate majority leader in my memory.
Behalf. Behest. Ok, that’s fine. I just don’t think a guy with an ego the size of Texas would let Reid get away with it if he didn’t, uh, “condone” it.
The difference between the two is that “behest” means Reid was asked to do it. “Behalf” means he did it without being asked. That was my point in mentioning Rostenkowski. Sometimes you don’t need to ask.
Oops. Accidentally logged on to Red State.
Steve
I just don’t think a guy with an ego the size of Texas would let Reid get away with it if he didn’t, uh, “condone†it.
But all indications are that Obama barely even speaks with any of the Congressional leadership of his own party. Obama is, shockingly, not a people person. He’s a politician for the targeted marketing age, and doesn’t have to actually do much of that interpersonal stuff by which things get done. Seriously, all that golf, and very little of it with people who could help him get things done.
Which is why I think Reid wasn’t so much an incompetent Majority Leader as much as he was a Democratic loyalist taking one (or many) for the team.