Harry Reid, Meet Chuck Schumer
The other day I noted that Harry Reid was already downplaying expectations for what Dems could accomplish now that they’re within reach of 60 votes:
“We have 60 votes on paper,” Senator Harry Reid, the majority leader, said Wednesday in an interview. “But we cannot bulldoze anybody; it doesn’t work that way. My caucus doesn’t allow it. And we have a very diverse group of senators philosophically. I am not this morning suddenly flexing my muscles.”
Compare that with what Chuck Schumer told HuffPo’s Sam Stein in a new interview, namely, that now that Dems have 60 votes they don’t need to compromise, in particular on the cherished public health care option:
“If you did a consensus within the Democratic Party, you would find the level-playing-field public option to be the answer,” said Sen. Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y. “And now that we have 60 votes, it seems to me like we don’t have to turn it inside out for something we don’t like.”
Reid is narrowly right that it’s still an uphill slog to 60 votes, and Reid wasn’t talking policy specifics. But the difference in tone is instructive. It’s unclear why Dems would concede the possibility of failure in advance. Seems like it makes more sense to stake out a strong position, say you’re going to the mat for it, avoid conceding any ground, and make opponents grapple with how to deal with it, as Schumer is doing.
This blog’s homepage is here. RSS feed here. Twitter feed here. Email me here.
I wonder if Schumer is making a play for the thrown. I don’t agree with how he handles issues related to Israel but other than that I would DEFINITELY take him over Harry Reid. If anybody out there is reading this that are a part of the powers that be PLEASE tell Schumer to kick Reid to the curb.
That should be throne. Dang preview would be nice..hint hint.
workin’ on that, SG.
SG, I think Durbin would be a much better replacement than Schumer, although Schumer would certainly be better than Reid
holyhandgrenaid
I would probably go Pat Leahy, then Durbin, then Schumer in that order
What would it take to get a new Majority Leader? I was looking up who’s who in the Democratic leadership (http://democrats.senate.gov/leadership/) and maybe Reid isn’t the only one to blame for allowing Dems to get pushed around. Maybe Boxer is not up to the task of whip.
I don’t think you can get Boxer out of the whip seat, for several different reasons. And I don’t think the failure can fall on her shoulders. If the ML isn’t willing to twist arms, as Harry Reid himself has admitted he is terrible at, what can a whip threaten people with? Not a d@mn thing thats what. Still I would love to know what the procedure is to get Harry Reid the hell up out of there.
One has to wonder: don’t Leahy. Schumer, Durbin and a few others get it? If Harry Reid wants to concentrate on his re-election bid (not a certainty) then he should be persuaded to give way. I regret saying this: but the guy does NOT look like a leader. It is unfortunate, but Harry “Lacking Optics” Reid really looks awful when he tries to assert leadership. Schumer and Boxer look and talk tough.
I’d rather have 59 Dems in the Senate with a Majority Leader who has a pair than 60 Dems being led by a spineless ninny who keeps throwing up a white flag when we’re supposed to be charging. As a progressive I’m pulling for Reid’s opponent in Nevada.
Harry walked away from a promising career in boxing after learning that he would have to punch back.