Slog

News & Arts

The Stranger Suggests

Critics' Best Bets
Music Arts & Food


Line Out

Music & the City
at Night

Wednesday, January 20, 2010

Another Nominee Departed, or the Senate Strikes Again

Posted by on Wed, Jan 20, 2010 at 4:59 PM

I’m going to riff off of something that Dominic posted earlier today about yet another nominating setback for the Obama Administration, this time at the hands of arch-reactionary Jim Demint (SC—seriously, what is with that state and crazy politicians?). The episode is distressing in and of itself, but it also points to several larger trends in the Senate, highlighting the intransigent nature of today's opposition, and the anti-progressive nature of the institution as a whole.

This time the victim Erroll Southers, who Obama tapped to head up the Transportation Security Administration (TSA), a body made startlingly relevant this Christmas by the noticeable uptick in crazy men with explosives down their pants on our nation’s airliners.

There are a couple points here, the first of which Southers himself made quite ably:

“It is clear that my nomination has become a lightning rod for those who have chosen to push a political agenda at the risk of the safety and security of the American people," Mr. Southers, a former F.B.I. agent, said in a statement. "This partisan climate is unacceptable…”

Republicans have been doing this with every single nominee they can come up with a remotely feasible excuse to block. We are a year into Obama’s term and dozens of nominees are still being held up in the Senate, the world’s most irksome legislative body. This seriously impedes the government ability to, well, govern. At TSA for example, changes that need to be made could probably be worked out without a departmental chief, but a guiding hand would be helpful in sorting out the nitty-gritty details and providing general leadership. With Southers out of the running, how long will it take Obama’s team to pick a replacement? And will the Republicans block the next one too? At this rate, TSA might not have a chief until the summer. Plenty of time for more crazed pants bombers to slip through the cracks. And why? Because the Republicans will basically do anything to muck up Obama’s ability to perform his job—how else are they supposed to return to power, being bereft of worthwhile ideas of their own.

But the demented DeMint has another reason for his obstinacy: Southers is labor-friendly.

The nomination was strongly opposed by Republicans. Senator Jim DeMint of South Carolina had placed a block on the nomination, saying he feared that Mr. Southers would attempt to grant collective bargaining rights to tens of thousands of the agency’s employees, including the 45,000 security screeners who have become a familiar presence at the nation’s airports.

The agency is part of the Department of Homeland Security. About 180,000 government employees lost their union rights in 2002 when President Bush signed the bill creating the department. Mr. Bush contended that after the terror attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, the new department needed greater flexibility in handling its employees.

Labor friendly nominees have been having a particularly tough time maneuvering their way through the Senate. A number of the Department of Labor’s (DoL) top positions remain unfulfilled because conservative senators have blocked their nominations. Both the Solicitor to the DoL, the department’s third highest position, and the head of the Wages and Hours Division were held up by Mike Enzi, a Republican senator from Wyoming who darkly hinted of their possible connections with, *gasp*, ACORN. (The allegations were baseless.) Lorelei Boylan, the proposed head of Wages and Hours, actually dropped out of the running because the process was dragging on for too long. This is particularly unfortunate given how pervasive wage theft has become in recent years—one of the very issues the division is meant to tackle.

Isn’t it funny how the obstructionist, anti-majoritarian rules in the Senate (also, see: filibuster) are usually used to block progressive reform, often related to workers? Labor law reform has been attempted by every Democratic administration since Johnson, and each and every time it was blocked in the Senate by a filibuster (and this was before the maneuver became the every day occurrence we see now). Doubtlessly the same would happen to the Employee Free Choice Act if it ever passed the House, which it won’t. Now we are seeing any nominee with a hint of labor favorability questioned fiercely at the least, and impeded for months until they drop out at worst.

Well, chalk up another win for the Vast Hyper-Capitalist Conspiracy. Also known as America’s entire political economy.

Sigh.

 

Comments (11) RSS

Oldest First Unregistered On Registered On Add a comment
1
Jake, when are you going to call Liz at the Guild and organize the Stranger?
Posted by Forget it, Jake, it's Chinatown. on January 20, 2010 at 5:56 PM
2
I call bullshit on you, you partisan hack. "Because the Republicans will basically do anything to muck up Obama’s ability to perform his job—how else are they supposed to return to power, being bereft of worthwhile ideas of their own."

BULLSHIT. Obama's fucking up his own job quite well. More war anyone? Bailouts to Wall Street while millions lose their jobs and homes? Corporate welfare for health insurance companies? Attacks on public education and teachers' unions? No progress on lgbt rights? No progress on immigration reform?

As long as idiots like you make every fucking excuse in the world to defend your shitty politicians, we will never have change. Fuck you and your racist, sexist, homophobic, corporate-coddling, environment-destroying Democratic Party.
Posted by Jake Blumgart, how does Obama's ass taste? on January 20, 2010 at 6:00 PM
gloomy gus 3
Points very well taken. But in vetting nominees Obama needs to find someone who knows how to answer honestly the frist time, too:

But GOP opposition to Southers escalated rapidly after The Washington Post reported that he had given Congress and the White House misleading information about incidents two decades ago in which he inappropriately accessed a federal database to obtain information about his estranged wife's new boyfriend, possibly in violation of privacy laws.

[...]

Paul Light, a professor of public service at New York University and a specialist in presidential transitions, said the collapse of the nomination raises questions about how the White House and Congress review top job candidates. "This is another example of where the presidential vetting process has failed," Light said. "They should have detected this early and moved on to another candidate."


http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/con…
Posted by gloomy gus on January 20, 2010 at 6:15 PM
gloomy gus 4
Fuck. "first".
Posted by gloomy gus on January 20, 2010 at 6:16 PM
5
Southers is a seriously flawed nominee who pussied out rather than face the music.
Blame Obama.
Blame Southers.
Blame your momma, if you like.
You are deluding yourself (a common Liberal past time, for sure...) if you blame the Republicans.
Posted by America knows whose fault it is.... on January 20, 2010 at 6:54 PM
6
re: the Senate and "the 'anti-progressive' nature of the institution as a whole".

The Senate is doing it's job wonderfully.
It is designed to be a brake, to introduce thoughtful deliberation into the process.
Liberals should learn to work the system instead of endlessly bitching and whining about it.

But then again, the Founding Fathers weren't as clever as you, were they Jake...

moron.
Posted by your 6th Grade Civics teacher on January 20, 2010 at 6:59 PM
7
Is "riff off" the same thing as "rip off"?
Posted by ReGurgitis on January 20, 2010 at 7:00 PM
Will in Seattle 8
Like anyone cares what America-hating Republic Party of No comrades "want" ...
Posted by Will in Seattle http://www.facebook.com/WillSeattle on January 20, 2010 at 7:18 PM
9
Every time I think Republicans can't act any worse they always prove me wrong.

They make me say something I never thought I would; I'm glad my parents are dead and are spared further horrors.
Posted by Mr. Moon on January 20, 2010 at 11:03 PM
10
@8

Massachusetts seems to care....

(Democrats outnumber Republicans here more than 3 to 1....)
Posted by 53% on January 21, 2010 at 5:23 AM
11
Jake,
We can understand your frustration and disgust with the Senate.
Really.
But you are pissing in the wrong direction.
Direct the stream down your leg. Into your own shoes.
Washington State sends two of the emptiest, palest, most uninspiring insipid wet noodle excuses for 'leadership' that one could imagine to the Senate.
Shit in- Shit out, as the techies say...
Why doesn't Washington scrounge up even one Senator with a pulse and a clue and send them to DC.
Let's start there and see what develops...
Posted by America (the Real one...) on January 21, 2010 at 6:38 AM

Add a comment

Advertisement
 

All contents © Index Newspapers, LLC
1535 11th Ave (Third Floor), Seattle, WA 98122
Contact Info | Privacy Policy | Terms of Use | Takedown Policy