Republicans refuse to allow Consumer Protection Bureau

[Riot]

I'm sick of these ridiculous obstructionists in the Senate wrecking the democratic process.

The Dems didn't have the balls to get rid of the filibuster this round, they were crazy.

http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/pol...fica034050.php

Political Animal Blog
December 12, 2011 8:40 AM
A radical embrace of nullification
By Steve Benen

On “Fox News Sunday” yesterday, Chris Wallace asked Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) about Republicans refusing to allow lawmakers to vote on Richard Cordray’s nomination to head the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. The GOP Senate leader wasn’t the least bit embarrassed about his party’s abuses.

<snip>

Congress passed a bill that was signed into law by the president. Last week, a Senate minority — not a majority, a minority — decided it simply won’t allow that law that’s already on the books to be executed.

In case this isn’t obvious, the American system of government isn’t supposed to work this way. Indeed, it’s pretty much the antithesis of our constitutional process.

Republicans may not care about this, but you should.

The GOP minority isn’t even questioning Cordray’s qualifications. Rather, Republicans are saying they refuse to allow existing law to function until Democrats meet the GOP’s demands and does Wall Street’s bidding. When the Senate minority is satisfied, they’ll consider allowing the law to function — if they feel like it.

As a matter of legal and institutional principles, Americans haven’t seen tactics like these since the Civil War. It led James Fallows to explain yesterday, “This strategy depends absolutely for its success on its not being called what it is: Constitutional radicalism, or nullification.” Jonathan Cohn made the same point last week, and Thomas Mann referenced a “modern-day form of nullification” in July.

Political tactics and schemes come and go, as politicians and parties win and lose. But what Republicans are doing now does real damage to the American system of government. It is, by any meaningful definition, a serious and important political scandal.

[hi_im_god]

the problem with advocating for the demise of the filibuster in the senate is that democrats or independents that caucus with democrats will be defending 23 of the 33 seats up in 2012.

i'm not saying the republicans aren't up to gifting a few seats our way like they did in delaware and nevada last cycle but i wouldn't bet against a republican senate majority in 2013 without double digit odds.

there are too many red states that elected democrats in 2006. most of those seats are going to flip back. do you really want to get rid of the filibuster with mitch mcconnell deciding what legislation gets a floor vote?

[Riot]

Originally Posted by hi_im_god

there are too many red states that elected democrats in 2006. most of those seats are going to flip back. do you really want to get rid of the filibuster with mitch mcconnell deciding what legislation gets a floor vote?

Mitch McConnell is deciding right now what legislation gets to a floor vote. That's the problem. The minority, McConnell, is refusing to allow a vote on Cordray to come to the floor. They passed a law, they created this bureau, and McConnell is refusing to even allow a vote on the proposed head. Until the law is undone to his satisfaction. It's absurd. The Senate is supposed to be majority rule. McConnell has been completely obstructionist, making everything 61 votes. He should be ashamed of this legacy. Simply ashamed.

Reid should change the rules to at least make them physically hold the floor during a filibuster. And the way the GOP kept the Senate in session with a skeleton crew of three over August recess, so Obama could not make any recess appointments, is disgusting too.

Obama should make 100 recess appointments in the one minute when they close the old session, and gavel the new session into being in January. The federal court system is grinding to a halt, there are not enough judges, because the Republicans haven't allowed appointments in the past three years.

I don't know what to make of the "snip other than it's biased and the author has a severe case of adhd.

[Riot]

Originally Posted by Coach Pants

I don't know what to make of the "snip other than it's biased and the author has a severe case of adhd.

What the hell is Lindsey Graham talking about? Voting on it? It's already passed and is law. He already voted on it!

Graham:

“So this consumer bureau that [Democrats] want to pass is under the Federal Reserve. No appropriation oversight, no board. It is something out of the Stalinist era. The reason Republicans don’t want to vote for it is we want a board, not one person, making all the regulatory decisions, and there’s no oversight under this person.