E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSSCapitol Hill isn't exactly home to the nation's most beloved institutions. Over half of Americans say that they have little or no confidence in Congress, according to the latest NBC/WSJ poll, and less than a third say that their representatives in Congress deserve to be re-elected in November.
Many things about the United States Senate -- sometimes described as "the world's greatest deliberative body" -- are opaque and inaccessible to all but a tiny portion of Beltway insiders. Its rules are complex, its history is long and rich, and the relationships between its members can often make the difference between gridlock and legislative victory.
NBC Senate producer Ken Strickland sat down with nine departing senators to get their takes on how the Senate works, what has changed during their tenure there, and what they’ve observed about their colleagues. He conducted hours of interviews, comprising over 130 pages of written transcripts, in order to better understand these lawmakers' combined 158 years of service in the upper chamber.
Starting Monday, a 4-day series of stories about the "Exit Interviews" he conducted will be posted on msnbc.com and here on First Read.
Be sure to check it out.
Leave a Comment:
Will any of these interviews demonstrate how one could confuse 'filthy and obfuscating' with 'long and rich?'
I think that's what FR meant by opaque and inaccessible.
Touche!
The Senate is just a corporate owned entity whose sole purpose is to write laws that protect and increase the wealth of the wealthy, and if you think that is an "overstatement" just look at the list of decent, fair bills that have come from the house of representatives that the senate systematically turned in to ridiculously corrupt pieces of legislation that were dictated to the senators by their corporate masters, all designed to suck the wealth out of our nation for the greedy few, they have ruined our country to enrich themselves, they have been more destructive to our country than any terrorist organization could ever dream of being, traitorous scoundrels each and everyone.
If you ask me, there need to be a lot more exit interviews. How about we start with any federal employee who does not pay his or her taxes?
The LA Times is out with a story about federal employees throughout the nation who owe ONE BILLION dollars in back taxes. Check out who is one the list:
we begin in the Obama White House, (why am I not shocked), where we find that 41 of his trusted aides owe us $831,000.
They look like pikers compared to the 638 Capital Hill workers, who owe $9,3 million. That breaks out to 421 House staffers who owe $6,524,892; and 217 Senate staffers who owe $2,774,896.
Let's go back up the Hill, as it were. The Treasury department, those tender keepers of our tax dollars, employs 1,204 workers who owe $7,670,814 in back taxes.
"Then, we have Hilda Solis' Labor department. Ms. Solis, you will recall, has back tax issues of her own, so it will not surprise you to learn that she employs 463 people who owe a total of $7,481,463.
Let's try the Justice Department-surely it is peopled with those who take such things seriously,right?
Wrong.
1971 Justice employees owe a whopping $14,350,152.
The grand prize, however, goes to Homeland Security. 4856 Homeland Security personnel owe the taxpayers $37,012,174.
None of these people should be employed. In fact, a Republican congressman introduced a bill to fire any capital hill employee with back tax issues. He got enough Republican signatures to move forward, but NOT ONE Democrat signed on.
Is it too much to ask that those running the government pay the taxes they inflict on the rest of us?
I cannot wait for the pretzel logic from the left to excuse this.
They get no passes from me on this one - I don't care who you are or what you make, you should pay your bloody taxes regardless.
Sad thing is those back taxes are just a small portion of the total owed by Americans.
The interviews should prove interesting reading. The Senate does have a rich history and plenty of arcane rules. One rule that must be revised is the filibuster. Once a method to allow debate, it has diminished to a blockade preventing debate. Senator Harkin hopes to change it so that with each cloture vote, the number required to prevent passages descreases. This allow the minority party the opportunity to actually debate and sell their ideas without interferring with the Constitution's majority rule. That is only fair. When one party abuses the filibuster as the GOP has done to the point of literally blocking everything from judge nominees which hinders the justice system, Secretaries of ? depts and their key staff, to actual legislation, it is time to change the rule.
The Senate filibuster is the primary reason people are disgusted with Congress, they see nothing getting done and wonder why. Let us hope that GOP Senator Voinovich's decision to stop the GOP blockade because the country is hurting will lead to others coming to the same conclusion. McCain said Country First but senate republicans have said Party First.
I agree Jody--the filibuster rule should be changed. I think each party lives with it when it is in power because it figures it will need it when the pendulum swings and the party is back out of power. Not a concern for the people but a concern for their own power. I apply this to both parties.
I do think that people are fond of bashing Congress but they have a habit of re-electing their own Senator and Representative when push comes to shove.
I do think that people are fond of bashing Congress but they have a habit of re-electing their own Senator and Representative when push comes to shove.
I understand what you are saying, but sometimes you have to look at the alternative. Maybe the people in Nevada are not happy with Harry Reid, but the alternative is Sharon Angle. In California, we have Barbara Boxer who I am going to vote for because she is a much better choice than Cruella F_Uprina. Miss Golden Parachute who has already proven with her record at HP that she is unreliable and she is fond of sending jobs overseas.
No it's not. If anything, it's just the opposite.
The majority of Americans wanted HCR, or aspects of it - reform in one form or another. The majority of Americans did NOT want the final bill. The filibuster was used to protect the will of the majority. Instead America got lies, browbeating, Louisiana Purchase, Cornhusker Deal, "deem" and pass, and generally got it shoved down America's throat. Democrats justified this abuse bt saying, "We need to pass it so we can find out what's in it", "they will like it once they find out what's in it", on and on. Well, America hates it, and America hates the way the Democrats passed it - the circumvention of the filibuster was central.
Same with all of Obama's/Democrat's legislation. America, and most Republicans are for aspects or central purposes of the legislation, but the legislation is always packed with Obama's agenda for the expansion of the role and control of the federal government, something the majority of America does not want. The majority's only protection has been the Republican's use of the filibuster.
Bottom line - Obama campaigned as a post partisan centrist. He was elected and has governed as a radical liberal, a big government progressive. That is not what America voted for.
America was dupped and the only check and balance has been a filibuster.
The filibuster is a very important element of the check and balance. As is the extra super majorities required to amend the constitution.
Bobo, selective amniesia does not count as facts, when the dopes of nope passed the tax cuts and the med care budget busters do you remember how they did it? Ahh didn't think so. The filibuster has been a drag on this country when it is abused, and don't give me the phoney protecting liberty and the constitution Glen Beck drivel, get a new idea.
Exit Interview this!
If you are going to discuss the filibuster, please distinguish between the real filibuster and the fake filibuster.
The real filibuster is a delaying tactic which buys the minority time to muster a majority before a vote.
The FAKE filibuster allows the minority to shelve a bill forever so that the majority never gets to have a vote.
I have no problem with the real filibuster. The fake filibuster is UNCONSTITUTIONAL. The rules of the Senate must conform to the rules of the Constitution; the fake filibuster, Rule 22 revision, FINO, does
the FINO, filibuster in name only, does NOT conform to the Constitution. It should be abolished.
I think we should have the same rule for the rest of the gov. held offices , like we have for the president. Two terms and your out. This would put a stop to a lot of the good old boy deals that our life time office holders do behind closed doors.
The lifetime members make deals with the new members. The new members make deals with the new members. The problem in the senate is the fake filibuster, not a lack of term limits. Outlaw the fake filibuster and most of our problems go away, legislatively.
s