While reading an article by David Waldman on filibuster reform I came across an old statement reminding me that Senate Democrats said they intend to reform the rules for their own caucus by electing the Chairs of Senate Committees. The current method is the seniority system and it has lead to such abominations as Blanche Lincoln over Agriculture and Joe Lieberman over Homeland Security. The seniority system tends to put the most bought and paid for, business as usual, progress resistant, politicians in the positions of greatest power. While electing the Chairs is not a not a guaranteed solution to the Senate’s many ills, it would give younger, more progressive Senators a greater voice. It also would tend to keep well established DINOs, with an ongoing record for backstabbing America by voting with Republicans out of such positions. Both health care and financial reform would have been much stronger, had they not been shepherded by Baucus and Dodd, respectively. The problem is that Democrats announced this intend way back in March. Frankly, I had forgotten all about it. Have they?
In an earlier post, I noted that Senate Democrats who fretted that rules reform would be attacked as a "power grab" were hiding behind an excuse from which they (intentionally) could never escape. And that though the party that changes the rules will have to absorb that attack,
they will still, in the end, be the party that got it done. And that will be what matters on the day after the political points from the attack are scored.
Democrats who allow this potential attack to dissuade them are essentially saying that the only party they’ll permit to change the rules is the other one. They’d rather wait and lob an impotent and hackneyed political charge that will fall on deaf ears and in any case be disregarded and forgotten in the wake of the majority’s newfound ability to act, than take charge and actually be a part of a majority that could take the reins itself. And that’s not an ally you’ll want to put much trust in.
Frankly, Democrats who end up playing the game for the other team ought to have more to worry about from internal caucus reform than from rules reform:
Senate Democrats intend to elect the chairs of committees when the next Congress convenes, which could upend a tradition that prioritizes seniority over party loyalty, legislative effectiveness or any other merit-based criteria.
If Senate Dems do opt to select their committee chairs and decide on other matters of seniority this way, Senate traditionalists — whatever their motivations — would be wise to pay close attention to the will of the majority of the caucus on other major reform proposals… [emphasis added]
Inserted from <Daily Kos>
Maybe they remember. Maybe they forgot. Or maybe they stated the intent so early, because they figured we would forget. I think we should remind them. Don’t you? Please spread this one around! Tell your Democratic Senators to determine leadership by vote, not seniority.
Ever since the Dodd-Frank financial reform law was signed in July, the question has been whether it would actually lead to a stable financial system. If the Republicans who will control the House next year get their way, the answer will surely be “no.” 
A few days ago, incoming Agriculture Chairman Rep. Frank Lucas (R-OK) 
Israel’s foreign minister, Avigdor Lieberman, said today that a peace deal with the Palestinians is impossible and that Israel should pursue a lesser deal instead, an idea the Palestinians swiftly rejected.
