America’s native criminal class

via The Federal Times:

A bill to promote government transparency faces an uncertain future because of a far-from-transparent hold placed upon it in the Senate.An unknown number of senators have blocked legislation to create a public, searchable Website of all federal grants and contracts. Senate rules permit any senator to anonymously block consideration of a bill on the floor, effectively killing the measure.

The fact that Senate rules permit any senator to anonymously block consideration of a bill speaks volumes about the self-serving nature of the Senate. If a senator is not willing to stand up for his actions in the Senate, he has no business there at all. Secrecy in public matters serves only to facilitate corruption.

The bill under consideration would help citizens to discover how their money is being spent. Some senators don’t want this to happen because they profit from the current arrangement. All senators are complicit in this swindle insofar as they permit the current rules to stand.

Posted on August 19th, 2006 by pwyll
Filed under: law, politics

3 Responses to “America’s native criminal class”

  1. Paco Malo, on August 19th, 2006 at 5:39 pm Said:

    Your complaint here is based on one unsupported statement in the Federal Times article, to wit, “Senate rules permit any senator to anonymously block consideration of a bill on the floor, effectively killing the measure.”

    There was a time when there was a way for one United States Senator to tie up a bill, by filibuster. Then the cloture rules where changed and this last vestige the power of one Senator fighting alone was gone.

    And it was and is all very public.

    I’ve been following Senate rules my entire adult life and have never heard of, nor ever saw the rule referred to by the Federal Times used. A one sentence, unsupported statement in an online publication I know nothing about does not convice me such a rule exists.

    Bills die anonymous deaths in committee, not on the Senate floor. If someone out there will show me I’m wrong, I will thank them.

  2. pwyll, on August 19th, 2006 at 9:14 pm Said:

    I believe you may be correct in asserting the Senate rules do not allow secret holds. Yet the practice exists. Consider this excerpt from the Congressional Record :

    [Congressional Record: March 28, 2006 (Senate)]
    [Page S2438-S2439]
    ELIMINATING SECRET HOLDS

    Mr. WYDEN. Mr. President, I am hopeful that shortly the Senate will be voting on a measure that will take a very significant step forward by bringing sunshine and public accountability to the Senate.

    If you walk the streets of this country and ask someone what a hold is in the Senate, I don’t think you will get 1 out of 100 people who will have any idea what you are talking about. But the fact of the matter is, a hold in the Senate is the ability to block a piece of legislation, block a nomination from being even discussed in the Senate. As a result of a hold, the Senate will not even get a peek at a topic that may involve millions of our citizens, billions of dollars, and affect the quality of life of citizens in every corner of the land.

    It would be one thing if the Senator who exercises this extraordinary tool–this tool that carries so much power with it–if that Senator would exercise the tool in public and could be held accountable. Unfortunately, holds are now placed in secret. They are done behind closed doors. The sponsor of a piece of legislation will not even know about it. It seems to me a Senate that is serious about lobbying reform absolutely must stop doing so much of its important business in secret, behind closed doors.

    I will offer later in the day, I hope, with Senator Grassley, Senator Inhofe, and Senator Salazar, an amendment to bring a bit of sunshine to the Senate. It is an amendment that would not abolish the hold. Senators’ rights would be fully protected. Senator Collins is in the Senate, and as a result of the colloquy we had several weeks ago, this legislation also protects the Senator’s right to be consulted on a piece of legislation. Certainly, that is something all Members feel is important. If there are bills that affect a Senator’s State or that they have a great interest in, that Senator would have an opportunity to study the legislation and to reflect on what it means.

    What we say in this bipartisan amendment is when a Senator digs in, when a Senator plans to exercise this extraordinary power, the power to block a bill or a nomination from ever being heard, we are saying that Senator has got to be held publicly accountable. What we require is that a Senator who exercises a hold would have to so state in the Congressional Record. They could still use their procedural rights to make sure they have a chance to oppose the legislation and to oppose it strongly, but they would be identified as the person who was so objecting.
    [[Page S2439]]

  3. Paco Malo, on August 21st, 2006 at 10:23 am Said:

    “…. [If the Senate] is serious about lobbying reform [it] absolutely must stop doing so much of its important business in secret, behind closed doors. ….” From the Congressional Record quote in our Editor’s comment above.

    Thank you for informing me on this ghastly hold practice and, furthermore, doing the Federal Times’ reporter’s job better than she did.

Leave a Reply

« The tail end of the spear Well I’ll be damned »