Carter, Baker to head election reform commission

  • Thread starter Thread starter Digitonomy
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
D

Digitonomy

Guest
From the AP, Jimmy Carter and James Baker III are to lead a commission to suggest changes to federal elections. The Carter Center has helped numerous countries make the transition to free and fair elections, and Baker has his own jet-setting credentials as Secretary of State under Papa Bush negotiating tirelessly with the Israelis and Palestinians, working on behalf of the UN to try to establish elections in Moroccan-occupied Western Sahara, and of course heading W’s legal team following the disputed 2000 elections.
Other members of the privately funded panel include former Senate Minority Leader Tom Daschle, D-S.D., who lost his seat in last year’s election, and former Reps. Lee Hamilton, D-Ind., Susan Molinari, R-N.Y., along with Robert Mosbacher, the first President Bush’s secretary of commerce.
Click to expand...
 
With that moltley crew, do not expect anything to come from it.

The spectum of people on the commisssion makes it impossible for any agreement on anything :banghead:

PF
 
Maybe, although there’s no whackos on the list - all are pretty well-respected (although I’m not srue what Molinari ever did), so anything they do agree on will have that much more legitimacy coming from a politically diverse group.
 
40.png
Digitonomy:
Maybe, although there’s no whackos on the list - all are pretty well-respected (although I’m not srue what Molinari ever did), so anything they do agree on will have that much more legitimacy coming from a politically diverse group.
Click to expand...
I was talking mainly about Tom Daschle. In his last number of years in the Senate, he had become an obstructionist ideaeologue (is that even a word?:ehh: ). With his somewhat supprising ouster from the Senate, I have a feeling that he will have an axe to grind.

PF
 
I don’t buy that about Daschle. He really was a drag to listen to, but I think most of his rep as an obstructionist comes from the fact that he was the minority leader. It was his job to represent and articulate the Democratic position, and that was only newsworthy when it was in opposition to the president or the majority.

The result was that he acquired that image, and was further painted that way in the media, in the same way that Newt Gingrich’s obstructionist strategies were all you heard about when he was around.
 
40.png
Digitonomy:
I don’t buy that about Daschle. He really was a drag to listen to, but I think most of his rep as an obstructionist comes from the fact that he was the minority leader. It was his job to represent and articulate the Democratic position, and that was only newsworthy when it was in opposition to the president or the majority.

The result was that he acquired that image, and was further painted that way in the media, in the same way that Newt Gingrich’s obstructionist strategies were all you heard about when he was around.
Click to expand...
The difference being that Gingrich actually had alternative ideas to offer in counter-point to those he was opposing.
 
40.png
Digitonomy:
Maybe, although there’s no whackos on the list - all are pretty well-respected (although I’m not srue what Molinari ever did), so anything they do agree on will have that much more legitimacy coming from a politically diverse group.
Click to expand...
Haha depends on your definition of whacko. I really have no respect for Carter OR Daschle. Heck I disliked Daschle so much I gave to Thun even though I live on the other side of the country and have never even VISITED that state.

Lisa N
 
I suspect Daschle had his own ideas as well, but since his opposition was as minority leader, those ideas would never see the light of day. Gingrich, on the other hand, was Speaker of the House. His ideas could not only get a fair hearing, he could actually get them passed and sent over to the Senate.

Unfortunately for Gingrich, his opponent was the president. In the game of demonizing your opponent, the Democrats in the White House turned out to be more skilled in the end. Likewise with Daschle and the Republican White House, although not as many people cared about him since he was only minority leader.
 
40.png
Digitonomy:
I suspect Daschle had his own ideas as well, but since his opposition was as minority leader, those ideas would never see the light of day. Gingrich, on the other hand, was Speaker of the House. His ideas could not only get a fair hearing, he could actually get them passed and sent over to the Senate…
Click to expand...
Any senator or representative can advance any idea he pleases, and write any bill he wants.

Gingrich was not Speaker of the House in his early Congressional career – in fact, the Republicans were in the minority. Yet, even as a fairly junior member of the minority party, Gingrich advanced ideas, introduced bills and offered alternatives to those proposals he opposed.
40.png
Digitonomy:
Unfortunately for Gingrich, his opponent was the president. In the game of demonizing your opponent, the Democrats in the White House turned out to be more skilled in the end. Likewise with Daschle and the Republican White House, although not as many people cared about him since he was only minority leader.
Click to expand...
That may be true – but to say Gingrich had no ideas to offer in opposition when he was in the minority is simply false.
 
vern humphrey:
That may be true – but to say Gingrich had no ideas to offer in opposition when he was in the minority is simply false.
Click to expand...
Which is why I did not say that.
 
40.png
Digitonomy:
Which is why I did not say that.
Click to expand...
Therefore I stand by my original comment: “The difference (between Gingrich and Daschle) being that Gingrich actually had alternative ideas to offer in counter-point to those he was opposing.”
 
I’m sure I could go back and dredge up various ideas and bills that Daschle put forth. However, as I mentioned he really was a bore, and I have no interest in doing so. Furthermore, I suspect you don’t really mean your statement literally, but rather that Daschle simply had no ideas or legislative proposals that impressed you. Fair enough.
 
40.png
Digitonomy:
I’m sure I could go back and dredge up various ideas and bills that Daschle put forth. However, as I mentioned he really was a bore, and I have no interest in doing so. Furthermore, I suspect you don’t really mean your statement literally, but rather that Daschle simply had no ideas or legislative proposals that impressed you. Fair enough.
Click to expand...
I mean that Gingrich had a coherent agenda and was not fairly called an “obstructionist.” He had counter-proposals to put forward, and had a vision for America (a vision which anyone is free to like or dislike.) You could ask Gingrich, “Well, what’s YOUR solution to this problem?” and he could give you an answer.

Daschle was not like that – he was the sort of person who was willing to tell you what you should NOT do, but didn’t often have original ideas about what we SHOULD do.
 
While I certainly have more respect for Gingrich’s intellectual prowess than Daschle’s, I think much of the difference you describe is due to the fact that Gingrich was on the leading edge of a transformation of Congress. Daschle, on the other hand, felt (correctly) that his interests were best served by preserving federal agricultural subsidies, policies that favored labor unions, etc. Supporting innovative or radical change would simply undercut his position in most cases, so of course he wasn’t going to push for it - and when changes were in the offing, digging in his heels to slow it or dilute it was probably the best course for him.

He certainly had alternative ideas, but they were usually about different ways to preserve the status quo, or to compromise on small issues.
The difference being that Gingrich actually had alternative ideas to offer in counter-point to those he was opposing.
Click to expand...
So while I think the plain language of what you said is not true, I’ll agree with the larger point you were trying to make.

And, as for being an obstructionist, Gingrich had no ability to obstruct in the House minority. Once he was speaker, he was willing enough to obstruct that the government shut down. Whether he or Clinton deserves more of the blame is irrelevant, both were willing to see that game of chicken through until it was clear who would come out on top.
 
40.png
Digitonomy:
Once he was speaker, he was willing enough to obstruct that the government shut down. Whether he or Clinton deserves more of the blame is irrelevant, both were willing to see that game of chicken through until it was clear who would come out on top.
Click to expand...
Actually, vetoing the budget is one of the few things I admire Clinton for, not for his motives – to increase the budgen, but for his sand in doing it. If Reagan had done it, the federal debt would be much smaller.
 
vern humphrey:
Therefore I stand by my original comment: “The difference (between Gingrich and Daschle) being that Gingrich actually had alternative ideas to offer in counter-point to those he was opposing.”
Click to expand...
Spot on. Actully the list of the new voting czars looks like a coalition of the unemployable and unelectable. Can’t these people finding paying jobs in industries - they just never seem to want to go.
 
40.png
Digitonomy:
From the AP, Jimmy Carter and James Baker III are to lead a commission to suggest changes to federal elections. The Carter Center has helped numerous countries make the transition to free and fair elections, and Baker has his own jet-setting credentials as Secretary of State under Papa Bush negotiating tirelessly with the Israelis and Palestinians, working on behalf of the UN to try to establish elections in Moroccan-occupied Western Sahara, and of course heading W’s legal team following the disputed 2000 elections.
Click to expand...
Oh, my gosh! I though I finally had heard the last of Mr. Daschle. Next thing you know Bela Lugosi will show up on one of these commissions.
 
rastell said:
Oh, my gosh! I though I finally had heard the last of Mr. Daschle. Next thing you know Bela Lugosi will show up on one of these commissions.
Click to expand...

What do they say about old politicians. They never die, they just sit on commissions?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top