Join 3,514 readers in helping fund MetaFilter (Hide)


Don't like the rulings? Fire the umpire.
May 8, 2001 9:20 AM   Subscribe

Don't like the rulings? Fire the umpire. Trent Lott got the Senate's parliamentarian, a Republican, fired because he, appropriately, wouldn't exempt some bills from filibuster. It seems the GOP has abandoned any pretense of bipartisanship.
posted by anapestic (8 comments total)

 
Yes, I'm a liberal. But you don't have to have a jerking knee to see that this is unfair. Filibusters are sometimes abused, but there are policies as to when they're allowed and when they're not. This makes Lott look like a kid who throws a tantrum when he doesn't get his way.
posted by anapestic at 9:24 AM on May 8, 2001


Maybe Dove didn't eat bananas.
posted by vanderwal at 10:40 AM on May 8, 2001


Excepting the firing of the parliamentarian, because I don't know enough about the situation, exactly how does this demonstrate the GOP as the partisan bunch?

We've fallen a long way if trying to get legistlation to the Senate floor where it can be openly debated and voted on [up or down] a more partisan act than a filibuster.
posted by schlyer at 11:47 AM on May 8, 2001


It demonstrates the partisanship of the GOP because under the rules they were trying to impose, they wouldn't need ANY Democrats voting their way to get their legislation passed. With a filibuster, they still need only ten. Dubya ran explicitly on themes of avoiding the partisanship of Washington. After the election, it seems that he doesn't mind doing things in a unilateral manner.

I will grant that a filibuster is also a partisan act. But the Dems held off on a filibuster for the Attorney General.
posted by anapestic at 1:29 PM on May 8, 2001


Those that read the article will note two things that anapestic unsurprisingly did not mention:

1) Dove was fired from this job once before, by the Almighty Democratic Party.

2) The Democrats haven't been particularly happy with Dove lately either, but the GOP currently controls this position and thus they are the only ones with the power to get rid of him.
posted by aaron at 1:46 PM on May 8, 2001



Actually, Senate Democrats have had their problems with Dove, too. Today Tom Daschle said that he had "expressed my own misgivings about Mr. Dove on many occasions, for the very reason he was fired." Dachle also said that he would not have hired Dove in the first place, which isn't surprising because Dove was brought in by Bob Dole when he was majority leader.
posted by thescoop at 1:50 PM on May 8, 2001


The fact that the Dems fired Dove and that they've been unhappy with him only demonstrates that Dove was a strong Republican. In spite of that political leaning, he ruled against the Republicans, and they ousted him because of it.

However, I did hear last night, that Lott had agreed to promote the assistant parliamentarian, a Democrat, to Dove's former position, so I have to give the GOP credit for that one.
posted by anapestic at 6:52 AM on May 9, 2001


The death of bipartisanship? I don't think so. Trent Lott made the appallingly stupid decision that all committees would be 50/50 even splits, even when rules of seniority would've allowed for a GOP majority in certain key committees. As a result, key pieces of legislation - like the budget - have been stuck in committee for ages. His most salient attempt at assuring bipartisanship has blown up in everyone's faces. Bipartisanship is a lofty goal in theory, but it isn't always realistic when put into practice.
posted by Dreama at 9:27 AM on May 9, 2001


« Older Is this cybersquatting?...  |  Katie Couric: Your Execution M... Newer »


This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments