Tom Udall

The Future Of The Democratic Party: Younger Liberals In The US Senate

When one sees that Maryland Senator Barbara Mikulski, California Senator Barbara Boxer, and Nevada Senator Harry Reid are retiring in 2016, and know that other older Senate Democrats have limited time left in the Senate, it makes it clear that it is time to examine who among the “younger” generation of liberal Senate Democrats may be perceived as the future of the Democrats beyond Hillary Clinton, Joe Biden, and even Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders.

Even if Hillary Clinton becomes President, where is the hope for liberal Democrats in the future, as there are very few Democratic governors. The “youth” movement in the Democratic Party is therefore in the hands of the following younger liberal Senate Democrats:

Connecticut Senator Chris Murphy (41)
Hawaii Senator Brian Schatz (42)
New Jersey Senator Cory Booker (45)
New York Senator Kirsten Gillibrand (48)
Colorado Senator Michael Bennet (50)
Delaware Senator Christopher Coons (51)
Wisconsin Senator Tammy Baldwin (53)
Minnesota Senator Amy Klobuchar (54)
Michigan Senator Gary Peters (56)
Virginia Senator Tim Kaine (57)
Oregon Senator Jeff Merkley (58)
Rhode Island Senator Sheldon Whitehouse (59)

These are the present Democratic hopes for the future, to make an impact on the level of Mikulski, Boxer, Reid, along with Vermont Senator Patrick Leahy, California Senator Diane Feinstein, Florida Senator Bill Nelson, Maryland Senator Ben Cardin, Illinois Senator Dick Durbin, Connecticut Senator Richard Blumenthal, Massachusetts Senator Ed Markey, New Mexico Senator Tom Udall, Oregon Senator Ron Wyden, Rhode Island Senator Jack Reed, Michigan Senator Debbie Stabenow, Washington Senator Patty Murray, New York Senator Chuck Schumer, Minnesota Senator Al Franken, and Ohio Senator Sherrod Brown, as well as Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders.

Of course, more liberal Senate Democrats yet unknown could be elected in 2016, including Kamala Harris in California and Patrick Murphy in Florida, and hopefully, the Democrats will take back control of the United States Senate, and some new Democratic governors might be elected, assuming a coattail effect of the candidacy of the Democratic nominee in the Electoral College, still highly likely!

The Democratic Party Winners In The 2014 Midterm Elections!

While the Democrats lost more seats in the House of Representatives, and lost 8-9 seats in the US Senate and majority control as a result, there WERE Democratic triumphs worthy of mention!

Jeanne Shaheen won a second term in the Senate, defeating Scott Brown in the New Hampshire Senate race.

Al Franken won a second term in the Senate in Minnesota.

Jeff Merkley won a second term in the Senate in Oregon.

Dick Durbin won a fourth term in the Senate in Illinois.

Chris Coons won a second term in the Senate in Delaware.

Ed Markey won a first full term in the Senate in Massachusetts, after having a special election victory in 2013 to replace Secretary of State John Kerry.

Cory Booker won a full Senate term in New Jersey.

Tom Udall won a second Senate term in New Mexico.

Jack Reed won a fourth Senate term in Rhode Island.

Mark Warner won a second Senate term in Virginia after a very close race with Ed Gillespie.

Brian Schatz won the remainder of a full term in the Senate from Hawaii.

Gary Peters was a new Senator elected in Michigan, to replace retiring Senator Carl Levin.

In the Governorship elections, Andrew Cuomo in New York and Jerry Brown in California won major victories, and also, Democrats kept or gained control of Colorado, Connecticut, Hawaii, Minnesota, New Hampshire, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont–a total of ten victories. Their biggest win, however, was Tom Wolf, defeating Tom Corbett, making Pennsylvania, the sixth largest state, run by Democrats again!

It is not that Democrats have a total great number of victories, but it is worth mentioning that they are far from giving up on regaining the Senate in 2016, and many Governorships are likely to go to the Democrats as part of a “wave”, helped along by the strong likelihood of a Democratic Presidential nominee winning in 2016, and by a substantial majority in the Electoral College!

Republican Weakness In Defeating Democratic Incumbents In Senate Races A Long Term Trend!

In all of the discussion of US Senate races in the upcoming Midterm Elections of 2014, many fail to realize the historical record of the failure of Republicans to have much success in defeating Democratic incumbents over a long period of time, while Democrats have been much more successful in that regard.

From 1946 to 2012, only TWICE have Republicans been able to defeat a large number of Democratic incumbents–1946 (10) and 1980 (12).

Since 1982, the number of Democratic incumbents defeated in each two year cycle has never been more than two, and six times there have been NO Democratic incumbents defeated.

Meanwhile, Democrats have defeated Republican incumbents in large numbers many times—8 in 1948; 10 in 1958; 7 in 1986; 5 in 2000; and 6 in 2006.

So to assume that a large number of Democratic incumbents, including Mary Landrieu of Louisiana; Kay Hagan of North Carolina; Mark Begich of Alaska; Mark Pryor of Arkansas; Mark Udall of Colorado; Al Franken of Minnesota; Jeanne Shaheen of New Hampshire; Tom Udall of New Mexico; and Mark Warner of Virginia will be defeated, defies history!

Since World War II, the reelection rate for US Senators is 80 percent.

And since 1980, Democrats have defeated 38 Republican incumbents, to just 12 for Republicans defeating Democratic incumbents!

The Disappointing Filibuster “Reform”: Basically More Of The Same!

After so much discussion of changing the filibuster rules of the US Senate—including the idea of a 51 vote majority, instead of 60, being enough to move forward on legislation, and the requirement to the return of the “talking filibuster”—ultimately, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid of Nevada has made a deal with Republican Minority Leader Mitch McConnell to make only slight, minor changes in the filibuster rules, with senior members of the Senate reluctant to push for major reforms, because both parties realize either could be in the minority in the future, and would want the power of the filibuster to promote their agenda, or prevent actions harmful to their interests.

The reform plans of Oregon Senator Jeff Merkley and New Mexico Senator Tom Udall, therefore, fall by the wayside, and instead the veterans, including Michigan Democratic Senator Carl Levin and Arizona Republican Senator John McCain, won on the issue of keeping minority rights to bottle up legislation.

This is a massive blow to the Obama Administration, and makes the likelihood of much of his program and agenda to have a real chance to pass into law far less likely.

So the Senate, as great a body as it has been historically, remains the center of gridlock and stalemate, and adds to the low rating that the Congress has in public opinion polls.

This is a very disturbing development for those who were hoping for real change!

The Need For Filibuster Reform In The US Senate

The Senate is in a crisis situation, unable to accomplish much, due to the ridiculous filibuster issue, which has totally derailed action or voting on so many matters in the past few years.

The Republican minority has been able, just by threatening a filibuster, to block approval of judicial and executive nominations, and prevent serious discussion and voting on crucial matters. The filibuster, however, does not presently require that any Senator or Senators take the floor and talk for hours and hours, as Senator Strom Thurmond of South Carolina did in 1957, when he set a record of 25 hours for a personal filibuster, or having an 83 day group filibuster against the Civil Rights Act of 1964, before finally cloture was voted, and the filibuster was overcome.

So there have been proposals to modify the present requirement that 60 votes are needed to allow movement forward on any Senate issue.

Some want a simple 51 vote majority, similar to the 218 simple vote majority needed in the House of Representatives, while others want a 55 vote majority needed to move forward.

And others suggest something even less of a controversy: Bills for debate could not be filibustered, and filibusters could not be used to prevent formal negotiations with the House on Senate passed legislation, what is called the formation of a conference committee, which used to be common, and now is very rare.

Also, a Senator would have to be on the floor to mount a filibuster, or else, a vote on the bill would proceed. So the old filibuster rule, best represented by the Thurmond example, would require a commitment by one or a group of Senators to give the effort by personal sacrifices, speaking constantly on the floor of the Senate, to stop the bill from moving forward.

Senator Jeff Merkley of Oregon and Senator Tom Udall of New Mexico have proposed these reasonable changes, and Joe Biden, as presiding officer, could move such changes forward, but there are seven Democrats, out of the 55 in the new Senate, who seem to be opposed.

These are Diane Feinstein and Barbara Boxer of California, Carl Levin of Michigan, Patrick Leahy of Vermont, Max Baucus of Montana, Jack Reed of Rhode Island, and Mark Pryor of Arkansas. Notice that these Senators are all senior and older, longer serving members, with the shortest amount of service being Pryor, in the Senate since 2003.

This failure to understand how important reform is makes one watching this legislative mess feel very frustrated, and leaves one with the feeling that Senate reform will likely fail, and further undermine respect for our Congress and its ability to get things done!

Mitt Romney And His Mormon Church: Disturbing Realities

With Mitt Romney seemingly the likely Republican Presidential nominee, focus turns to his religious beliefs, as he would be the first Mormon President if he won.

The Mormons, a much persecuted religion in its less than 200 year history, is seen by mainstream Christians of all denominations as a cult, rather than a Christian sect, even though Mormons claim to be Christian. There is discontent about its polygamous past, and the fact that a radical separatist sect still practices polygamy in areas of Texas, Arizona, Utah, Idaho, Nevada and Wyoming. Its decision to get involved often in politics, rather than promote separation of church and state, also disturbs many.

But there are other more important issues.

The Mormon Church forbids any non Mormon from entering its temple in Salt Lake City, Utah.

When Mitt Romney was married to Ann, his wife, she needed to be converted, but her parents were not allowed in the Mormon Temple for her marriage, and had to stay outside.

When Ann Romney’s father died in more recent times, he was converted to the Mormon faith after death without his permission, and despite the fact that he was a religious skeptic, in actuality a declared atheist.

This tendency to convert dead people has included Jews who died in the Holocaust, who unknown to their families, have been converted.

The Mormons keep detailed genealogical records on many millions of people around the world, useful in studying ancestry and family connections, but disturbing to many as intrusion, and wonderment about why they are gathering so much personal information on non Mormons.

The Mormon Church never allowed blacks in the church until suddenly in 1978, from on high in church leadership, and under a federal lawsuit on civil rights, magically they were finally allowed into the church as equals.

The Mormons, like all other religious groups, treat women as second class citizens in the church, and promote the traditional family role as a norm for women, who are not allowed leadership in the church and are expected to obey their husbands, and spend their life pleasing them in all possible ways.

Mormon women are encouraged to have large families and avoid using birth control of any kind.

The Mormon Church will disown any member who is homosexual, and the norm in most Mormon families is to do so, and the names of such people are officially banned from the Mormon Church records as if they never existed. The church led the fight against gay marriage and Proposition 8 in California in 2008, financing the attack openly.

While the Mormon Church has tended to support immigrants and work to promote citizenship for illegal immigrants, it is seen primarily as a practical matter, due to the widespread missionary movement of the church in Latin America.

The Mormon Church has been strongly anti labor oriented, in regards to union organization and workers rights, even before the recent anti labor crusade by conservative Republicans.

The Mormon Church takes a very conservative view on most issues, and most of its political arm are Republicans. although there are major exceptions such as Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid of Nevada, Senator Mark Udall of Colorado, and his cousin, Senator Tom Udall of New Mexico.

These realities stated above are not pointed out to promote bias or discrimination, but to make the general public aware of the growing influence of the church in American life, much of its practices and agenda highly disturbing!

Former Vice President Walter Mondale Calls For Filibuster Reform In Same Vein As The Progressive Professor! :)

A few days ago, the author called for filibuster reform in the Senate, a move which is to be introduced by Senator Tom Udall of New Mexico on opening day of the Senate on January 5.

Former Vice President Walter Mondale, in an op-ed in the New York Times, has now called for the same reforms that the author suggested: 55 Senators instead of 60 to stop a filibuster; a filibuster must be conducted by Senators staying on the floor of the Senate, not just by threat; and no more “secret holds” by one Senator to prevent action on a nomination or a bill.

Action by the full Senate this Wednesday could change the course of history of the next two years of the Obama Presidency, and make the Senate a functioning body, instead of a malfunctioning institution, which stands in the way of progress and action.

The eyes of the nation will be focused on what happens on Wednesday, and hopefully, Vice President Joe Biden, who also sees the essential need for reform, will help push it through by parliamentary maneuvers and the power of his leadership and connections with both parties of the Senate, with his 36 years of distinguished service in the upper body!

The Abuse Of The Filibuster By The Senate Minority: Time For Reform!

As the political year ends, the record shows that the use of the filibuster tactic by the Republican minority in the US Senate has reached an all time high.

It used to be that the filibuster was utilized by Southern Democrats opposed to the passage of civil rights legislation.

Now it is used as a weapon to stop ALL action in the Senate, with simply the threat of a filibuster preventing progress on legislation, or presidential nominees for the federal courts and other offices.

The number of motions for cloture has doubled in the past few years, and has nearly quadrupled since the 1970s and 1980s, and was used in the single digits until the 1970s.

It used to be that mounting a filibuster meant a group of Senators taking turns in speaking on the floor for hours and hours, while now just the threat stops action.

Is this proper use of the filibuster, just to say a group will mount a filibuster, and all action is paralyzed as a result?

Of course, the answer is no, so the Democratic majority and Senate President and Vice President Joe Biden will have one chance to change the rules of the Senate, on opening day of the 112th Senate on January 5, 2011.

The move to reform the filibuster is being led by junior Democrats, including Senators Tom Udall of New Mexico, Claire McCaskill of Missouri, Michael Bennet of Colorado, Jeff Merkley of Oregon, Sheldon Whitehouse of Rhode Island, and Mark Warner of Virginia. But senior Democrats, including Tom Harkin of Iowa and Carl Levin of Michigan also back the idea of reforms.

The problem is to realize that the Democrats could be in the minority in the Senate in 2013, and the desire to retain influence if they are the minority, so tinkering with the Senate rules on the filibuster, as well as other tactics, such as the ability of one Senator to use the “hold” tactic on action, must be carefully considered, so as not to reverberate on the Democrats in the future times when, inevitably, they will NOT be the majority!

The Total Abuse Of The Filibuster By The Senate Republicans!

It used to be that southern Democrats used the filibuster to prevent civil rights legislation.

Sometimes, the filibuster has been used to block a particularly controversial piece of legislation, or a Presidential nominee who was seen as undesirable.

But never has the filibuster been abused as it is this year by the Republican party, which is using the filibuster tactic to block ANY action on ANYTHING that the Obama Administration proposes, other than his appointments as Cabinet advisers and the selection of Associate Justice Sonia Sotomayor!

The Republicans have used it to block just about every judicial nominee that President Obama has selected!

In a time of great challenges, we also cannot see agreement to move ahead on Wall Street reform yesterday because of a filibuster based on party alone, and also on such a crucial issue as immigration reform!

The filibuster was not designed to be utilized in such an abusive way, and it is a mockery of democracy to allow such a tactic to be used in the way it has been in recent months!

Senator Tom Udall of New Mexico has introduced a proposal backed by other junior senators, which would work to reform the system, as it is essential for any progress toward dealing with the major challenges we face.

It is, however, doubtful that any change will come soon, and the effect is to make the US Senate present an image as a legislative body which is unable to meet its responsibilities to the American people, and to damage its historical reputation as a respectable institution!