Blogs and Stories
Senate Stonewallers
Chip Somodevilla / Getty Images
As Joe Lieberman threatens—again—to filibuster health care, Benjamin Sarlin and Samuel P. Jacobs report on Capitol Hill’s most ornery No Men. Plus, a gallery of the Senate’s all-time biggest troublemakers.
When Sen. Joe Lieberman issued fresh threats to filibuster any health-care reform proposal including a public option, he did more than just blunt the momentum generated by the House of Representatives’ passage of a bill this weekend. Lieberman also took his place in a venerable line of legislators bent on using parliamentary procedure to hold up the works. The deans of delay have already been hard at work this Congress, blocking Obama’s nominations for the federal bench and slowing the appointment of the U.S. ambassador to Iraq. It's all becoming too much for Majority Leader Harry Reid, who let loose on the GOP for obstructionist tactics last week after Republicans held up a bill extending unemployment benefits for weeks, even though it passed unanimously after they relented.
Click Image Below to View Our Gallery of Obstructionism's Greatest Hits
These tactics have a rich history. Beginning in the 19th century—historians usually trace the first major threat of a legislative slowdown to 1841—the filibuster became the obstructionist’s weapon of last resort—a way for a passionate minority, sometimes a minority of one, to put the breaks on legislation. The marathon-length address embraced by crusaders and cranks alike—and knew no partisan bounds.
So who are the most epic obstructionist senators today? While there is no reliable means of tallying filibusters and holds, some lawmakers have truly distinguished themselves in recent years. Remember: the further from the center of power a member is, the more attractive these tactics designed to protect the minority appear to be. Among the league leaders in delay of game:
1. Joe Lieberman
(I-CT)
The Democratic nominee for vice president just nine years ago, Lieberman today is a man without a party; though he caucuses with the Democrats, he won reelection as an independent. And his latest threat—to filibuster any health-care reform bill that comes before the Senate bearing a public option—is giving the Democrats fits. “If the public option plan is in there, as a matter of conscience, I will not allow this bill to come to a final vote because I believe debt can break America and send us into a recession that’s worse than the one we’re fighting our way out of today,” Lieberman said on Fox News over the weekend. But, as The Washington Post's Ezra Klein notes, the argument doesn't even begin to make sense: The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office has determined that a public option would reduce the deficit and since it's funded by individual premiums instead of taxpayer dollars, there's no public liability attached. The baffling disconnect has supporters of health-care reform worried that Lieberman's objections might be personal and idiosyncratic—given his many tangles with the Democratic Party, including a primary loss in 2006 to Ned Lamont that led him to run as an independent.
2. Tom Coburn
(R-OK)
Secret holds upset the natural order on Capitol Hill; it’s difficult to figure out who is behind them, so it’s harder still to know who to lobby to get them lifted. An exception to the rule: Sen. Tom Coburn, who is so proud of the procedural roadblocks he’s placed in recent years that he has a section of his personal Web site devoted to the practice. At one point in 2008, Coburn was delaying nearly 80 bills, according to The New York Times, including a $10 billion collection of omnibus legislation that lawmakers had dubbed the “Tomnibus.” Most recently, Coburn has used his parliamentary tricks to hold up a major veterans' health-benefits bill, prompting Democratic lawmakers to hold a press conference all but begging him to withdraw his objections on Monday.
3. Jim DeMint
(R-SC)
• Peter Beinart: Why Democrats Were Smart to Bail on Abortion
• Dana Goldstein: How Abortion Splits the Reform Coalition
• Matthew Yglesias: The Next Health Care Minefield
• Paul Begala: Forget Bipartisanship“The onus has been turned on the leader to get the 60 votes,” said Sarah Binder, co-author of Politics or Principle: Filibustering in the United States Senate. After a military coup took place in Honduras in June and the democratically elected president was forced into exile, most would have thought it a good idea to have State Department officials in place with relevant experience who could address the fallout in the region. But that wasn’t the path Sen. Jim DeMint followed. He not only defended the generals behind the coup but protested the White House's condemnation of it by placing holds on the nominations of Arturo Valenzuela, Obama's pick to oversee Latin American affairs for the State Department, and Thomas Shannon, Obama's choice for ambassador to Brazil. "I will not lift the hold on these nominations until the United States works out an arrangement with the Honduran government to recognize the outcome of the elections in Honduras and restores the U.S. foreign aid that has been cut by the Obama administration,'' DeMint told the Miami Herald in September, essentially holding American foreign policy hostage. He finally released his holds this week after the Honduran government reached a tentative deal with deposed president Manuel Zelaya that would allow him to return to his country, although the final status of the arrangement is in serious doubt.
4. Mitch McConnell
(R-KY)
As the Senate Minority Leader, Mitch McConnell has set the stage for the numerous procedural difficulties Democrats have faced in moving legislation forward. “Mitch McConnell is the architect of the Republican filibuster, which now is applied to virtually all controversial bills,” Thomas Mann, a senior fellow of governance studies at the Brookings Institution, told The Daily Beast. While a Republican filibuster on major legislation like health-care reform are hardly surprising, critics have accused McConnell of going overboard by flexing the muscle on less objectionable legislation. This month, the GOP filibustered an extension of an unemployment bill; when they finally relented, it passed 98-0. Republican leaders said they did it to protest what they saw as a lack of consideration for their proposed amendments. But arguments over parliamentary procedure were likely little comfort for the 200,000 laid-off workers who temporarily lost their unemployment benefits thanks to the delay. Majority Leader Harry Reid has gone after the Republican leadership in recent days over a host of alleged delays, including putting off confirming the surgeon general during the H1N1 crisis.
The Right Dumps Carrie
Jacob Bernstein is a senior reporter at The Daily Beast. Previously, he was a features writer at WWD and W Magazine. He has also written for New York magazine, Paper, and The Huffington Post.
What's Joe's Problem?
Lloyd Grove is editor at large for The Daily Beast. He is also a frequent contributor to New York magazine and was a contributing editor for Condé Nast Portfolio. He wrote a gossip column for the New York Daily News from 2003 to 2006. Prior to that, he wrote the Reliable Source column for the Washington Post, where he spent 23 years covering politics, the media, and other subjects.
Geithner's Stock Plummeting
Jeff Madrick is a contributor to the New York Review of Books and a former economics columnist for the New York Times. He is editor of Challenge Magazine, visiting professor of humanities at Cooper Union, and senior fellow at the New School's Schwartz Center for Economic Policy Analysis. He is the author of Taking America, The End of Affluence (Random House) and The Case for Big Government.
Sarah Palin, Creationist?
Benjamin Sarlin is a reporter for The Daily Beast. He previously covered New York City politics for The New York Sun and has worked for talkingpointsmemo.com.
10 Palin Hits the Leakers Missed
Benjamin Sarlin is a reporter for The Daily Beast. He previously covered New York City politics for The New York Sun and has worked for talkingpointsmemo.com.
Samuel P. Jacobs is a staff reporter at The Daily Beast. He has also written for The Boston Globe, The New York Observer, and The New Republic Online.
The Man Who Beat Glenn Beck
Benjamin Sarlin is a reporter for The Daily Beast. He previously covered New York City politics for The New York Sun and has worked for talkingpointsmemo.com.
10 Palin Hits the Leakers Missed
Benjamin Sarlin is a reporter for The Daily Beast. He previously covered New York City politics for The New York Sun and has worked for talkingpointsmemo.com.
Samuel P. Jacobs is a staff reporter at The Daily Beast. He has also written for The Boston Globe, The New York Observer, and The New Republic Online.
The Missing Pages in Palin's Book
Samuel P. Jacobs is a staff reporter at The Daily Beast. He has also written for The Boston Globe, The New York Observer, and The New Republic Online.
The Greatest Filibusters
Samuel P. Jacobs is a staff reporter at The Daily Beast. He has also written for The Boston Globe, The New York Observer, and The New Republic Online.
Lieberman is dirt. It really doesn't matter when a democrat or republican votes differently than his party once in a while however Lieberman thinks he is his own party while simultaneously trying to make believe he is a democrat and the democrats continue to accept him. He should have been removed from all democratic affiliation when he went independent. Are the democrats afraid of AIPAC?
Lieberman calls the Homeland security committee "my committee". He is the chairman. Joe seems to think everything belongs to him. Maybe it does as long as he continues to vote with AIPAC and the apartheid church state of Israel. Israel apparently owns and operates the USA and Joe is one of the spokesmen. The nagging question is "why do the democrats or anyone else tolerate him".
Mavrick, isn't that what you all called John McCain when he voted with the Dems. By the way is this Louis Farrakan you anti-semite!
Joe Lieberman has more integrity in his left pinky than the rest of the US Senate combined. Democrats abandoned Lieberman isolating him. Voters saw his integrity and elected him anyway ignoring the Democratic Party criminals.
Bullshit. Joe Lieberman lost the democratic primary because of his unwavering support of an illegal and immoral war. If your refering to the party establishment abdoning him what choice did they have? Were they supposed to reject the mandate of registered democrats and support him as an idependent while Lieberman cozied up to Bush & Dick Cheney. Joe Lieberman abdanoned the democratic party. Period. He is a sanctimonius fraud and a hypocrite of the worst sort.
I think Terrance what you are referring to is Joe unwavering support for his country and not like may in his party who try to turn acts of terrror into "man made disasters" like the current adminastration like to call them. Israel has been dealing with these disasters for a long time and the Fort Hood "man made disaster" should give everyone pause that if nothing is done one will be coming to a school or mall near you! If Joe had to leave the democrat party because these belief were unacceptable to them then we are in a lot of trouble my friend.
Big stretch to associate the administration with the Fort Hood shooting. If anything the army is to blame for not addressing the guy earlier.
Get your history straight menkenlite.
Democrats...actual voters mind you... voted against him in the primary. That is how democracy works. But Lieberman..with all his "integrity" decided to ignore the voters decision.
And now..this scumbag is going to do it again by using a fillabuster and blocking any sort of voting taking place. That is not democracy.
However, integrity in Congress is in very short supply, and the majority on the Senate couldn't carry Liberman's suitcase when it comes to integrity. Agree with him or not, he has always been steadfast in his beliefs. Obviously, the voters in Connecticut agreed, because he won by 10% over Lamont. The Democrats shoved Liberman under the bus, including Al Gore, when he entered the primary in the 2006 presidential campaign, and now they want his loyalty a vote on huge spending packages during this economic downturn. The Dems got Arlen Specter, so they didn't lose any votes.
What do you mean "steadfast in his beliefs?" Less than 4 years ago, Lieberman advocated universal healthcare with a "medicare for all" public option!
Just three years ago, he said he opposed the use of fillibusters and considered them "anti-democratic!"
Principled, my pasty white butt... his only principle is "whatever will get me on TV!"
idiotking: Please site his support for a public option.......... He and Sen Hatch introduced the Faircare proposal in 2005, but no where do I see that it included an entire makeover of health care insurance. He introduced the Healthy Americans Act (S.334) in 2007, which would establish a centrally financed system of private health insurance options for Americans, and was projected by the CBO that it would cause no new Federal expenditures, because the bill used money in the existing system to provied secure and portable coverage to all Americans. No where, again, did I see government funded health insurance.
Carole
"During a 2006 debate with challenger Ned Lamont, Lieberman claimed to be working towards universal health care.[87]
In 2009, Lieberman is opposed to a "public option" and stated he would side with Republicans and filibuster any attempt to pass major health legislation that includes one.[88] Since the beginning of 2005, Lieberman has received over $920,000 in campaign contributions from the health insurance industry.[89] He ranks 75th out of 100 senators for percentage of contributions from corporate PACs. [90]"
This is from Wikipedia and I have seen numerous clips on multiple news outlets from 2005 where lieberman was campaigning for universal healthcare. I will post if/when I find them.
I'd trade 100 Arlen Specters for a Joe Libermann. But the dems did crow when 'Ol Specter jumped ship. Funny though how different it is with them when somebody else does it from the ofhte side. That's when it's bad to do that. Hard to keep up with that reasoning.
bgeasyas123: Yes, he said he was working toward universal health care. He didn't, however, say that a public option would be part of a possible proposal. His 2007 Healthy Americans Act indicated otherwise.
Campaign donations from the health care industry is a false argument, as Obama and Clinton got more individually than Romney in 2008. Bottom line, all the candidates received money from various sectors, but that's not relevent to this discussion
"Joe Lieberman has more integrity in his left pinky than the rest of the US Senate combined."
Be careful menckenlite. This story has taken many twists and turns to date and probably has a few more surprises in store.
Joe is notorious for switching sides. Also Barack Obama has shown in the House that he only weighs in on the debate at the very last possible second. He has yet to exert any pressure on the Senate.
A lot can change over the next six weeks.
So, it would be a shame for you to praise Joe for his integrity this early. You may have to take it all back later.
Thank you! It will be a while of course because the dimwitted take longer to see. But Joe Lieberman will go down in history as one the most honest politicians to serve this nation. If the rest (both sides) had just a little of the integrity he has we wouldn't be in half this mess now.
Yes, he's probably the best US Senator to serve the nation of Israel
Lieberman has a long history of being one of the most corrupt politicians to ever sit in the Senate. Name one thing Lieberman ever did other than stuff his pockets. He's has taken over 950,000 to sell out his constituients from the Insurance industry.
Joe Lieberman cares only about Joe Lieberman.That is the way it has always been. Besides his outrageousness during the decades he has been in Washington, he now shows the dementia that comes to many of us at his advanced age. I am sorry Hadassah and his family have to witness the public display of his sickness but I am sure it is very hard to control him. One day he says one thing. The next day something else. One day he sounds like Uncle Bube and the next like the Grim Reaper himself. I suspect he will be too far gone mentally to run for election again. How sad for his legacy.
Lieberman's behavior is completely understandable. He is taking revenge on the Democrats who had the temerity to vote agaist him returning to the Senate.
Liberman has never been known for integrity, Corruption, yes! Integrity, no! All you have to do is look at the massive amount he has taken from the racketeering monopolistic insurance industry to know the Lieberman is now what he has always been, a paid shill. He is selling out the voters who let him stay in Congress and hopefully, will pay the price.
Joe Lieberman is the finest senator money can buy.
Lieberman is a traitor to the oath he took when assuming office.
He has neither the interests of his electorate nor America in blocking the Senate work.
Absolutely correct. At a minimum he is a shill for the State of Israel - where his true allegiance lies. He is also a rank opportunist. The Democrats would be better off by not letting him caucus with them. Screw the 60 vote super majority - it hasn't done anything for the Democrats so far.
Lieberman is precisely as Terrance72 says: "a sanctimonious fraud and hypocrite." As the father of a Jewish son, I was proud when Gore selected him as vice presidential candidate. Now Lieberman fills me with shame and disgust. My feeling even extends to Gore -- how could he trust such an awful man? He's Gore's Tartfuffe but unlike Moliere's Tartuffe, Lieberman's effect on the world is real and tragic.
"D'Amato filibustered for more than 15 hours against a bill that would close typewriter factory in his district."
Don't you mean 'cloase [a] typerwriter factory'? C'mon, eds.
Yah, that's one of several editorial oversights in this piece. Was this rushed to print or something? Needs a once-over by a pair of fresh eyes.
Thankfully there are a couple of Senator's that have a little common sense. A $1 trillion take-over of the health care system will sink this Country.
The democrats and the Obama administration aren't trying to "fix" the healthcare system with their overhaul, they are trying to "take over" and make American's more dependant on the government, making it bigger and bigger and more socialistic.
Wake up America!
Thank goodness that there are people in government that still have some sense.
In his case NON-sense!! He is an idiot!
It is inappropriate to direct anger toward individual Senators who use the filibuster rules in their current form to block legislation. The anger should be directed toward the majority party which allows the filibuster to remain in place.
Because the Senate is already structured to disproportionately represent the interests of small, rural, and conservative states, there is no need for a filibuster to protect the interests of the minority. Layering this arcane procedure onto the already less democratic institution drives the legislative system into gridlock.
It is time for the majority party to show some courage and reform the Senate rules to eliminate the filibuster.
The filibuster has an obvious use when employed appropriately. I don't see any value in a secret hold. Because they represent the public, senators should be prepared to explain any procedural decision they make that affects a law's passage. The legislative process falls under the guideline that if you can't readily defend your actions, you shouldn't be doing it.
As for the filibuster, there was a time when it was invoked only rarely. Now senators filibuster routinely. Because the culture of the Senate has changed, how it employs its internal rules ought to be modified in accordance with the times. The filibuster shouldn't be eliminated, but it should be altered to control the level of disruption that senators who abuse the rule bring to the legislative process.
Have to get off here for now but one parting question for you dems, How's your hope and change working for ya?????
Well, lets see, it's pretty hard to have any change or any hope in the system when the Republican party has obstructed everything Obama has tried to do -without proposing a constructive alternative. Any idiot can tear down a barn, it takes a carpenter to build one.
Our foreign policy is better than ever, the Fed is very well-run, we're having huge debates over the central issues that we've been trying to talk about for decades....
Overall I'd say pretty well, considering that America seems to believe that Congress in only important in so far as they can use it to blame Obama for any failure or lack in legislation. I don't think we'll ever stop being a nation of flip-floppers when it comes to separation of powers.
Just when I think Lieberman can't be any more repulsive, he sinks to yet another new low.
When will Connecticut voters get rid of this monstrosity?
If there is one gaping hole in our government, it is the ability of one, minority party to hold the progress of our nation hostage to their will. In too many of these cases, the minority represents the interests of big business and not the interests of the voting public.
Where debate and compromise once played an important role in the legislative process, cheap political tricks to stonewall and derail the spirit of democracy have become the norm. Where the progress of our nation and the welfare of the American people were once a consideration, these interests have taken a backseat to those who can best line the pockets of members of congress.
Never before in this long life have I ever thought that I would be witness to congressional rats eating through the spirit of this once great republic leading to a dysfunctional, sloth-like legislative branch of our federal government. It is no longer acceptable. We the people have only one answer: to win back our government by voting out those who would sell out the progress and future of our country to those who have used us and it to make themselves richer and more powerful.
YellowPaper, it is hardly a gaping hole. It was the clear intent of the Founders to prevent the tyranny of the majority via the instrument of the Senate, the electoral college, the Supreme Court, and other protections against the impassioned, unwise mob.
Without the Senate and it's two votes to each state, regardless of size, there would be no Constitution, Yellow. It was a non-starter without that provision.
Read history Yellow, and know your own country, understand its fundamental principles.
squareyellowpaper: I gotta agree with you. I expect I may be one of the oldest posting on here. I like to fight a little and instigate a little but you've pretty much got it nailed down. It doesn't matter which party is in control. They're still gonna screw us if they can. I think the best we could do is stop listening and throw 'em all out and start over. The new ones can't possibly do any worse that the ones we have. All the politicians have done for the past fifty years is feather their own nest. Look at THEIR health care. Look at the tax fraud and "buddy" deals. Yep, throw 'em all out and start over.
I thoroughly enjoy all of these attacks on Lieberman from the libs... Where were they in 2000? The libs must be anti-semites.
Sarlin calls the Republicans obstructionists for trying to stop the Obama freight train. Did he call Democrats obstructionists for trying to keep Bush from packing the courts? The Senate rules give the minority a way to fight against tyranny by the majority. How about loyal opposition? We haven't heard the phrase for a long time. I know the Republicans never used it to describe Democrats, but we need to start somewhere
We really are the masters of our own fate. Most in Connecticut who supported and voted for Sen. Lieberman have suffered for their unquestioning support.
Lieberman is an unspeakable person. He only cares about himself even though many of the residents of CT badly need healthcare. He can save lives and offer them a lifeline but he won't. Money!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Greed!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Medical insurance "reform" represents the greatest threat to our freedom and welfare since the Second World War.
No is the only answer anyone who truly believes in the U.S. Constitution can make.
In what way could insurance reform possible pose a threat to anyone other than the racketeering corrupt health insurance monopoly. That make no sense whatsoever. What grade are your in?
The Constitution clearly defines the powers of the 3 branches of our government. It specifically reserves anything not listed to the states and the people. The Constitution does not provide congress or the executive the powers necessary for healthcare changes.
This is a big issue. Progressives generally prefer loose interpretations of the Constitution using the general welfare clause to justify many government interventions. Their goal appears to be a more European style society giving government a far greater role in our lives. Conservatives and libertarians prefer a stricter interpretation of the Constitution and prefer less government intervention which they consider a grave threat to our individual liberty.
I'm not going to argue about your negative opinion of the health insurance industry. I will simply point out history shows us governments are capable of outstanding levels of corruption. You should be careful where yoou place your trust.
The stinky USA Health Care Industry owns Lieberman.Lieber-
man and his are whores.The master of the crooked republican senators is the stinky USA Health Care Industry.The crooks do not have integrity.
I say, let them filibuster. It was one thing when all you had was newspaper accounts of what was happening. Today you would have the 24hour news feeds showing these people rambling on about nothing for no other reason than to block the final vote. Of course Fox will portray them as heroes, but I wonder how long the nonsense would actually last if every foolish thing they say and do is endlessly repeated on YouTube.
The senate has become obsolete in it's present form. I think we ought to face reality and structure it so that the Senators represent not states but corporations. One third of the senate seats should be auctioned off every two years with a restriction that no single entity or it's affiliates could own more than two. In the long run it would probably be cheaper than the lobbying expense and it would make it clear and aboveboard who was a mouthpiece of an industry group.
The proceeds of this auction should be used to fund the congressional elections and it should become a felony for candidates for Representative to receive any corporate, PAC or other large private funding.
I'm watching the back and forth of this comment section and I find it hard to believe the we have GENUINE DEFENDERS OF JOE LIEBERSCHEISSER. I think they're cloak and dagger staff members of his office staff directed to soften the blogoshpere's outrage at a paid hack of the insurance lobby. Give it back at me with your "campaign" staff Joe.
Dibbles with love.
Lieberman is Fredo in the Godfather
He wants Reid and Obama to kiss his a** to get his vote
They may have to save him again from the caucus stripping his committee chairmanship
But will than engender any loyalty for him?
Absolutely not
And Sen. Harry Reid has pledged to do less? He, and his colleague in the House, Nancy Pelosi, have both been quoted as saying that they will do whatever it takes to shove their Obama Health Reform plan through. Pelosi succeeded, to the detriment of the Public, and especially those on Medicare (which will lose 1/2 Trillion dollars thanks to the Dem powerhouses) .
Senator Joe Lieberman is one of the most ethical, conscience driven people in the US Senate. His willingness to endure years of scathing verbal assault in his taking the stands he has is testimony to that fact. Those hurling epithets at this man have no more courage than a Hamas terrorist who shoots at Israelis from behind the backs of children. No courage, no integrity, no ethics.
America is fortunate to have a man such as Senator Joe Lieberman helping to formulate legislative policy.
Thank you.
As a first time user, your comment has been submitted for review. It can take anywhere from a few hours to a day or two for your comment to be reviewed, depending on the time of week and the volume of comments we receive.
Please log in to leave comments.