« Supreme Court: I Oppose John Roberts | Main | NJ-07: Ferguson Gets a Challenger »
Tuesday, September 20, 2005
MT-Sen: Max Baucus Runs from Democratic Party
Posted by Bob BrighamMontana Senator Max Baucus is a skittish senator known for bolting and running. In fact, Senator Baucus has quite a reputation for running. On November 22 of last year Baucus was running from something for 50 miles when he hit his head on a rock and needed urgent brain surgery. I'm no big city doctor, but I think Baucus lost his fucking mind:
WASHINGTON -- Montana Sen. Max Baucus, a Democrat, said Tuesday he will vote for Supreme Court nominee John Roberts. [...]Baucus is breaking with his party's top senator in deciding to vote for the 50-year-old appeals court judge and former Reagan administration lawyer.
Why is Max Baucus running from the Democratic Party? Instead of running away, why can't Max Baucus play with the team? Call each number below and ask.
Washington D.C.(202) 224-2651
Billings (406) 657-6790
Bozeman (406) 586-6104
Butte (406) 782-8700
Great Falls (406) 761-1574
Helena (406) 449-5480
Kalispell (406) 756-1150
Missoula (406) 329-3123
Washington DC Fax (202) 224-0515
Thanks for taking 10 minutes to make those quick 8 calls. If you have 2 more minutes, use the email form.
I am totally fuckin' pissed at Baucus. Senator Reid is from a redder state, but he isn't running from what he cares about. Why is Baucus chicken?
Baucus isn't even up until 2008 and (hopefully) won't be running for re-election. Senator Baucus doesn't need to go around acting like a dipshit coward, but this isn't the first time. Matthew Yglesias explains (2.1.04):
As a result, literally none of the president's signature initiatives -- from tax cuts to the resolution authorizing war in Iraq to the Medicare bill -- garnered sufficient GOP support to pass without cooperation from some Democrats, cooperation that the White House has largely succeeded in obtaining.Among the defectors, Sen. Zell Miller (D-Ga.) has tended to attract the lion's share of media attention for his florid denunciations of his ostensible party. But the practical effects of Miller's histrionics have been rather limited compared with the betrayals of his more low-key colleague Sen. Max Baucus (D-Mont.). As the ranking member (and, for a period, chairman) of the Finance Committee, arguably the Senate's most powerful, Baucus, who underwent successful brain surgery on Jan. 9, has not only voted for many pieces of Republican-backed legislation but actually taken the lead in authoring much of the president's domestic-policy agenda. During the 2001 tax-cut debate, Baucus cut a deal with committee Chairman Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) and the White House to co-sponsor a slightly watered-down version of the president's proposal. In doing so, he not only gave the GOP his vote but, more importantly, his support for the tax cut effectively handed the White House the staff and other committee resources under his control.
Fellow Democrats were even more aggrieved, however, by Baucus' behavior during the Medicare battle with which Congress closed last year's session. The Senate initially passed a compromise bill with support from Republicans and some liberal Democrats like Ted Kennedy (D-Mass.), while the House put forward a much more partisan piece of legislation on a narrow vote. A conference committee composed of members of both chambers was convened, but the Republican leadership, in a sharp break from precedent, said that though Democrats could be officially appointed to the committee, none would be invited to the meetings where the substantive negotiations would take place and the actual bill be written. None, that is, except for Baucus and the similarly cooperative John Breaux of Louisiana, who will retire at the end of the year.
By lending this farce a veneer of bipartisan credibility, Baucus and Breaux essentially denied the Democrats what was not only their best chance of defeating the bill in question but the party's last hope of putting a stop to a long string of Republican provocations aimed at reducing the minority party to window-dressing status. (emphasis mine)
WTF? Call each phone number and let your rage be heard. This is totally fuckin' unacceptable and you can quote me on that.
Posted at 09:30 PM in Activism, Montana, Netroots, Scandals, Supreme Court | Technorati
Comments
Add Sen Partick Leahy to those Dems who will vote for Roberts' confirmation, so I read. I've heard Roberts is a better, more moderate choice than the man he's replacing -- not saying much but with a conservative White House and Senate can we expect much more than a moderately conservative justice? He did, after all, advise a group working to protect gay rights in Colorado. I feel we need to focus more on winning the elections in 06 and 08 and let more conservative Dems do what they want on this issue. Sorry, maybe there's something I missed and Roberts is a real bad choice?
Posted by: mcittone ![[TypeKey Profile Page]](http://www.swingstateproject.com/nav-commenters.gif)
at September 21, 2005 09:14 PM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment
No, you didn't miss anything. I'm as blue as they come and I don't find anything so objectionable about Roberts as to command the venom that's been cultivated by the left over this one. And that's fine, we've got to get our game faces on at game time- I just happen to think that the next one is the real game.
On the other hand, though, Reid freed the Dems to vote their own way, and while a lot of the usual suspects have announced that they intend to vote against, some of these guys have their reasons for voting in favor, not the least of which is that Roberts hasn't done anything crazy enough to dissuade senators from voting to confirm him.
It's times like this, when the confirmation is a forgone conclusion and some members are gearing up for the next fight, that the trigger-happy nature of some of our folks becomes problematic. Take Armando over on Kos, for example. The elementary schoolyard bile that he was spewing after Baucus made this announcement should have been embarassing for real Democrats that associate with the site.
We need the moderates, and if we all lived on our own little island things would be different, but we can hardly talk about being the party of inclusion if we're going to try to exclude everybody that shows an independent spirit.
cheers,
Jason
Posted by: theshelldog at September 22, 2005 11:30 AM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment
Well said, Jason. I've never voted against a Democrat and consider myself to be true-blue as well. Just as the moderate Republicans become agitated with the wing-nuts of the right, so too, have I become disgusted with the nastiness of the wing-nuts of the left. Sen. Baucus led the way for Democrats to get elected in the West. Let's allow him to vote his conscience, even though I do disagree with him. He doesn't represent me, though. He represents the people of Montana.
Posted by: BCarr at September 22, 2005 11:51 AM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment
Well said, Jason. I've never voted against a Democrat and consider myself to be true-blue as well. Just as the moderate Republicans become agitated with the wing-nuts of the right, so too, have I become disgusted with the nastiness of the wing-nuts of the left. Sen. Baucus led the way for Democrats to get elected in the West. Let's allow him to vote his conscience, even though I do, in fact, disagree with him. McCain has courage when he breaks with his party's rank and file, and yet we also demonize those that branch out to formulate their own opinions.
Posted by: BCarr at September 22, 2005 11:53 AM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment
"Sen. Baucus led the way for Democrats to get elected in the West."
That line is complete crap. Senator Baucus screwed Democrats in the west. He "lead" the post-Mansfield/Metcalf era in Montana which completely sucked for Democrats. It took Brian Schweitzer to rebuild Democrats' image from the Baucus-stand-for-nothing into an image with conviction.
Baucus has no conscience, only Fear.
Posted by: Bob Brigham at September 22, 2005 06:37 PM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment