Blocking the fox from the henhouse

One of the Democratic tendencies that seem to bother the netroots and progressive activists more than anything is “deals” congressional leaders strike with Republicans. Invariably, these “compromises” tend to concede far too much to the GOP, and worse, lead to a problematic result that could have been avoided.

Take Hans von Spakovsky, for example. He served as a top political appointee in Bush’s Justice Department, and was a leading player in what McClatchy labeled the administration’s “vote-suppression agenda.” When it came to voter disenfranchisement, von Spakovsky was a reliable member of Team Bush. That’s not a compliment.

Naturally, the president decided to give him a promotion, rewarding von Spakovsky with a six-year term on the Federal Election Commission. Slate’s Dahlia Lithwick recently made a very powerful case that the nomination itself is insulting, and if senators have any sense, they’ll reject von Spakovsky out of hand.

And they would have, if the leadership hadn’t struck a deal that cleared the way for von Spakovsky’s confirmation. Thankfully, as Roll Call reported, the deal was scuttled.

Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) on Wednesday derailed a plan blessed by Senate leaders to vote on controversial Federal Election Commission White House nominee Hans von Spakovsky, a move giving Democrats time to breathe in the ongoing Senate stalemate on FEC nominees.

According to Democratic Senate aides, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) and Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) struck a deal mid-week to hotline four FEC slots that must be confirmed by the Senate before next year. As part of the proposed deal, a voice vote on fellow commission nominees only would take place if no Senators objected to von Spakovsky’s nomination.

But a vote on the deal, which was expected to come to the floor as early as today, appeared to be off by mid-day Wednesday after Obama — and unconfirmed others — voiced concerns that von Spakovsky’s nomination was too controversial not to go through regular floor proceedings.

Good. I realize that FEC nominations aren’t exactly high profile, and one has to be pretty clued in to even know who von Spakovsky is, but it was disappointing, to put it mildly, to think Dems were just going to let this guy slide by.

For those of you who want more background on von Spakovsky, I hope readers will take a couple of minutes to read Lithwick’s whole piece, but the point to remember here is that he has been at the heart of the indefensible, right-wing effort to prevent eligible voters from participating in elections. Tom DeLay’s re-redistricting scheme that violated the Voting Rights Act? Von Spakovsky approved it. Georgia’s re-redistricting scheme to disenfranchise black voters? Von Spakovsky approved that, too. The conservative campaign to fabricate an epidemic of voter fraud? Von Spakovsky helped create the scheme and execute it. When a U.S. Attorney in Minnesota discovered that Native American voters were being disenfranchised? It was Von Spakovsky who shut down the investigation.

The agreement approved by the Senate Democratic leadership would have cleared von Spakovsky’s nomination to the FEC as part of a package deal that would have let a Democrat onto the same commission. I realize that deals like this make Washington work, but Von Spakovsky is, for lack of a better word, dangerous. He no sooner belongs on the Federal Elections Commission than he does the board of the NAACP.

As Lithwick concluded, “More than almost anyone else — perhaps even including Alberto Gonzales — Hans von Spakovsky represents a Justice Department turned on its head for partisan purposes. Even if a seat on the FEC is merely symbolic, the last thing Democrats should be doing is confirming to that seat someone who symbolizes contempt for what it means to cast a vote.”

Apparently, some Dems haven’t forgotten that.

Obama and unspecified others? I’m not sure if I should be impressed with him or disappointed with the rest of the specified. Me thinks that Obama was the most prominent of the bunch.

Hmmm, where’s Hils? One would think that someone who claims to be a leader and willing to stand up and fight, she would have lead the charge front and center.

Sorry, but stories like these make me wonder about H Clinton more.

  • Well, they wouldn’t be dems if they didn’t cave. At least Obama came through. Harry Reid must go.

  • Well, Dan – I’d like to be impressed by Obama, but lately, I’ve been annoyed at the number of votes he’s missed, and at his general failure to be much of a leader in his day job. Today’s action is noteworthy both because it derailed a deal that should never have been allowed to be made, and because Obama showed up for work.

    If he would do more of that, it would be a step in the right direction for where we are right now, as opposed to giving a lot of speeches that talk about what he would do 15 months from now.

  • Obama must read the blogs, where Kevin Drum, among others, have been asking where the signs of leadership are in the Senate to suggest the ability to lead a nation, and where the action regarding change was to match the rhetoric. This is a very good sign on both points.

    The small piece CB left out (although he has covered it in the past) is how the name ever got this far, given that Dems control the committees. Sen. Nelson of Nebraska is the DINO we can thank for breaking party lines to get Von Spakovsky through committee.

    And as pleased as I am with Obama, I am equally disappointed in the far-too-accommodating Harry Reid. WTF???? Which party are you the leader of?

  • Zeitgeist – I thought Dianne Feinstein also had a role in Spakovsky’s nomination getting out for a full vote. Seems to me she caved on both Southwick and Spazovsky, but I could be wrong.

    Regardless – I am disgusted at the wilingness of Reid to sell out the Dems and cave every time the GOP raises its collective voice.

  • Good. I realize that FEC nominations aren’t exactly high profile, and one has to be pretty clued in to even know who von Spakovsky is

    Maybe Reid and many other Dem Senators are among those who aren’t clued in to politics enough to know who von Spakovsky is? That would explain quite a bit about how we got where we are now in this country.

  • Glad to see that at least Obama remembered he still has a job in the Senate; it looked to me like he was too busy interviewing for the next one to give this ne his full attention. And I wonder what position our other “running Senators” — Biden, Clinton and Dodd — staked out on this matter.

    OT, though not quite. My updated version of Firefox underlines what it thinks are mis-spellings. It happens, pretty much invariably, with surnames — its internal dictionary seems to recognize some but not many. Peculiarly, of the 4 names I typed in above, the only one it recognised was “Clinton”. I wonder if Haik is responsible for the update’s dictionary 🙂

  • I’m starting to believe that Harry Reid is a Republican’t sympathizer in Dem clothing. As the only Democratic member of the Church of LDS in Congress(the other 22 are GOPers), I have to wonder if he is getting marching orders from his Republican’t leaning friends in Salt Lake. Especially in a year when another of the faithful is running for Prez…hm?

  • Obama, Feingold, Kerry, and Brown all have holds on Hans. Schumer has backed off somewhat on his insistence that his nominee be confirmed forthwith.

  • Gridlock, @10,

    Don’t know about the motivation in the rest of his behaviour but, in this instance, it’s much simpler than a Great Mormon Conspiracy. The “square meal” that the “leadership” on both sides of the isle tried to ram down our throats consisted of 4 nominations — 2 Dem and 2 Repub. One of the 2 Dems was a Reid protegee and the deal was “I won’t block yours, if you won’t block mine”. In order to make sure of that, all four were to be decided on simultaneously, not individually — block one, block all four.

  • Harry Reid and the rest of the spineless pinstriped pimps masquerading as Democrats need to get a steel-toed size 12 upside their heads and maybe up their wide asses (wide from bending over and spreading for Republicans for so many years). No more money from me for Democrats until Reid is out (and I have raised several thousand dollars for Democrats in recent months – no more).

  • Let’s take out Reid’s “sleeper cell” while we’re at it. The guy is proof you cannot trust those cultists farther than you can see them with your eyes closed.

  • I think it was Grover Norquist who said, “bipartisanship is another word for date-rape”.

    He was right.

    The problem here is the Senate, which is a chummy, collegiate, “reach across the aisle” kind of comity country club. Not that Pelosi is doing that much better, but the House has always been more of a rough-and-tumble street fight than the Senate– remember Gingrich was a congressman.

    The problem is the same as it is everywhere: the Repugs know how to fight, and the Dems know how to bend over and surrender “for the greater good”.

    This is especially acute in the Senate with its filibuster and long history of chummy norms and trust for the Repugs to violate in order to rape the Dems.

    Senate Dems are getting played like a Super Nintendo. They fall for this shit every time.

  • Obama not only votes, he lobbies for what he believes when there’s at least a chance of winning or at least stopping a bad bill. His vote on Lieberman/Kyle Amendment would have been No, but it wouldn’t have mattered since the same spineless sellout DLC Democrats joined with Lieberman and Hillary in the lead to give the prelude to an attack on Iran 70+ votes in favor of that hideous bill. If the news covered Obama honestly, it would just be too obvious that he’s the only Democrat ready, willing and able to take on this fight if we just back him up enough to do it. Some folks can’t seem to take him seriously, for whatever reason, the media being an obvious one of many, I’m sure. No matter; those of us who do take him quite seriously work pretty hard to let everyone know what they almost missed. Get ready for a whole new perspective of America when Obama brings his principles to the presidency.

  • For those of you who are soused in the mouth-frothing Kool-Aid of a Mormon conspiracy: Wake up and smell the Postum.

    A little research will reveal that the LDS Church is party neutral and only rarely ventures into the political arena by advocating one side or the other of a political issue – after all, there are times when political issues and religious/moral issues will overlap. The church does encourage its members to vote and be civic-minded but you will not find “marching orders” emanating from Salt Lake to those politicians who happen to be Mormon.

  • Comments are closed.