Obama Senate office: Obama hasn't decided whether to return to vote against cloture, emphasized that technically not-voting-for-cloture is the same as voting-against-cloture.

as I understand it, the issue right now is not so much concerning the vote -- rather, it's about whether obama/hillary/biden et al will be there in person to ask questions, which could help dodd continue his filibuster longer.

It's a win-win for Dodd. He's clearly right on the issue and the timing can only help his campaign by either drawing his competitors away from Iowa or tripping them with their own words.

Hard to not see it as good for Edwards too. He either gets Iowa to himself while the sitting Senators are in Washington or he can carp on them for not doing what he'll claim he would have.

Greg. That's right and when I called Obama's office I encouraged him to get back for that very reason.

The Boston debate was cancelled.

http://news.bostonherald.com/news/2008/view.bg?articleid=1050032

A Democratic presidential debate that was scheduled for next week in Boston has been scrapped because of the earlier than usual scheduling of the Iowa caucuses, CNN said.

The Dec. 17 debate was sponsored by CNN, the John F. Kennedy Library and Museum and Politico.com, an online magazine. CNN’s Edie Emery said, “There are plenty other debates that we will be having in January, along with other networks.” The Iowa caucuses, the first vote in the nomination process, are Jan. 3.

This is all just rhetoric, right? It's my understanding that no one actually filibusters anymore; everyone just agrees that a filibuster would be in effect, and they move on to the next issue. Are republicans going to force Dodd to read phone books for seventeen hours? If so, why haven't we been doing that in the past year or two?

can somebody answer a (perhaps) naive question for me? why can the republicans scuttle progress with simply the threat of a fillibuster, whereas reid and the Dem leadership is going to see to it that Dodd actually has to stand up there and go through the motions? unless i'm misunderstanding how this works...i am going to grow more and more tired of Senator Reid.

Forget the matinee idol candidates. Dodd is looking more and more like the real thing - and, no, I am not a member of his campaign, nor was I previously a Dodd supporter.

It's true, CaseyL. He is a leader. I think he will be a great majority leader someday. Hopefully soon. I like Edwards for prez, though.

As it happens, I was an Obama supporter before this story broke and I am still an Obama supporter now, but I do have to agree with Casey L that this story shows Dodd exhibiting a species of leadership much to be admired. I will not pretend not to be disappointed in my own preferred candidate if he offers nothing more than moral support from hundreds of miles away.

M: I agree that Dodd is probably doing this primarily out of principle. And I like Dodd and there's no question he's right on the issue.

But does he have a long history of one man fillibusters on matters of great importance during his decades of service in Congress? Has he ever run a one man filibuster before? (I honestly don't know and hope a Dodd supported can bring me up to speed.) Or is this a new phenomenon and he just happens to be running for president right now? In other words, I think politics is somewhere in his calculus.

Now is the time to weigh in--call the following offices, in addition to calling your own senators' offices:

Barack Obama Senate Office: 202-224-2854
Barack Obama Campaign: 866-675-2008
Hillary Clinton Campaign: 703-469-2008

Tell them to get on a plane back to Washington, fulfill their Senatorial duties, and support Sen. Dodd.

Nothing wrong with being cynical but I think Dodd was realistic enough to know that he was not going to win the nomination before he got into this.

Dodd is running for Prez to try and shape the race. He is trying to push the candidates to where they should be. Would he like to be President? Sure. But he knows in his heart of hearts that its pretty unlikely.

Maybe he got into the race to be VP but he's not filibustering to score points in IA or anywhere else.

To all the cynics, Dodd is Not doing this as a political tactic. A strategy maybe, but it's not a tactic.

The reason is because Dodd pledged to filibuster telecom immunity back in October. The political landscape this year hasn't allowed for the tactical planning 2 weeks in advance, let alone 2 months.

Dodd decided on this a long time ago and could be paying a high price. He has had to abandon at least two days of meet and greets in Iowa. This is no small thing. Each missed meeting may mean missed votes. He may well lose votes for his actions.

More interesting is that Obama, Hillary, and Biden all previously pledged to support Dodd's filibuster, yet none of them are going to make good on their pledge. They claim to be supporting him by not being there to vote for cloture? But the only way to truly support a filibuster is to be on the Senate floor and be willing to take up the podium when Dodd is exhausted.

Apparently, Dodd's is to be the first real filibuster in over 15 years!

I think we should spend less time wondering about why candidates do the things they do and focus on what they do. Chris Dodd is a career politician. I would be astonished if the political consequences of going for a filibuster weren't part of his thinking before deciding to do so. And he may have thought that the benefits of being spoken of might outweigh the political benefits of shaking a few more hands.

But all that is not particularly relevant. The important thing, if you care about the underlying issue, is that he is one of the few people now taking an active stand against Bush Administration lawbreaking. The reason this might be of political benefit is because it is both a popular and good thing to do. I wish the other candidates would make a similar calculus, of appealing the intellect and patriotism of voters, instead of appealing to their desire to shake hands and critique speech style or balloon drops.

As for Edwards, I love what he says, but he also could take an active step in support of Chris Dodd by actually speaking in support of Dodd, and encouraging the other candidates to fly back, perhaps through a campaign moratorium. The fact that he isn't a senator now doesn't let him off the hook.

This quote from William Blake pretty much sums up the run of this administration vis a vis the law: "Truth has bounds. Error none."

Dodd is a highly motivated man of principal. I write not as a disinterested observer but rather as one Iowan who intends on caucusing for Dodd. Some of the other democratic candidates are similarly motivated by principle, but Dodd's record indicates that he strives to carry out his princples, and is not satisfied with simple rehtorical flourishes. He acts on his principles. Regardless of outcome of the filibuster or the caucuses I am proud of him. We all should be.

It won't be a long filibuster. The Senate just invoked cloture on the legislation. Only 10 Democrats voted nay. See the list below.

What a PATHETIC, spineless, unprincipled, ineffective bunch of politicians the Democrats are. They make me ashamed to have ever voted for any of them. They can't accomplish ANYTHING, not even with a majority in Congress. They can't even manage to block the Bush administration's abuses.

Boxer (D-CA)
Brown (D-OH)
Cantwell (D-WA)
Cardin (D-MD)
Dodd (D-CT)
Feingold (D-WI)
Harkin (D-IA)
Kerry (D-MA)
Menendez (D-NJ)
Wyden (D-OR)

Filibuster hasn't started yet.

That vote was on consideration of the bill.

Various speeches right now...

Just called Durbin's office reminded him of
Al Dixon's sellout on the Thomas Supreme Court Nomination. That Sellout gave us Carol Mosley Braun the next year.

On another note: I've cut two donation checks for Mark Pera and Donna Edwards, photocopied them, and sent the photocopies to DCCC with a note that I support Democrats and hope they will too. Is there a candidate running against any of these Bush-Dog Senators so we can send him/her a donation?

From behind the Orange Curtain... a flow chart:

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2007/12/16/3140/5458/343/422731

We're currently near the top, at the "30 hours of debate" stage.

Not that Reid won't try to ram it through pronto...

Does America truly have a two party system of government anymore? Perhaps I am overly cynical, but what would the reasonable observer make of the following events:
1. The Senate Judiciary Committee, supported by a substantial grassroots campaign and cloaked in the Rule of Law, reports a bill that party stalwarts and rank and file all praise for its successful emphasis on personal privacy and corporate accountability over special interests and unnacountable executive branch action. The Senate leadership, however, declines to send to the floor for a vote.
2. The Senate leadership instead presents to the full Senate a Bush Administration-supported bill produced in relative secrecy by the Senate Intelligence Committee (SB 2248) that omits, reverses, or otherwise defeats several of the core achievements of the Judiciary Committee's legislation.
3. Per established Senate practice, a Senator (Christopher Dodd D-Conn.) places a "hold" on the Senate Intelligence Committee's bill, a practice that should have ended the bill's consideration. Instead, Senator Harry Reid disregards the hold process, and moves SB 2248 on to floor debate. No other Democrat in the Senate files a similar hold, which would have made SB2248's path to the full Senate floor much more difficult.
4. Senator Dodd now promises a filibuster, but he cautions that he can only talk for as long as he is physically able. Several Democrats in the Senate, including three who aspire to be elected president in 2008 (Biden, Clinton, and Obama), have offered general support for such a filibuster. But NOBODY else is actually lining up to also filibuster, much less stand by and support the one senator who says he will filibuster.

For the overwhelming majority of the party's leadership and elected officials to have abandoned their principles on this high-profile issue that has such importance to the traditional party values of personal privacy, individual freedom and the rule of law . . . it really makes a person wonder.

Am I alone in my cynacism?
-rb

Can you imagine a senator missing a vote that will determine the country going to fascist control?
Can you imagine a presidential candidate that you would vote for missing such a vote?
My vote will not go to one that would miss such a vote. They would be traitors based on the definition of the word, and their oath of office to uphold the constitution. How many have upheld it? a handful?
It is good to know that your senator is a traitor when they ask for your vote next time.

@ the zapkitty:

Thanks for that link to the filibuster process posted at Daily Kos.

I am still disappointed that more than 10 Democrats didn't just step up right away and say we don't even want to take up this immunity junk, but I guess they will say they wanted to have "an open and honest debate on the merits" of the anti-American bill.

I am glad to see there is still time to contact my senator.

The fix is in, and enough members of the democratic party will support the immunity legislation to insure its passage. I am unprepared to differentiate between democrats such as Dodd and Dianne Feinstein. When TelCom immunity is made law, I wipe my hands of the party forever.

@ commentator

I have to disagree.

The far larger issue here is Obama and Hillary's decision to stay on the campaign trail. Were Either of them return to Washington for the sole purpose of filibustering this bill, the media would immediately shine a blinding spotlight on this legislation. The media spotlight would almost certainly doom this bill to failure.

The point is, Obama or Clinton by themselves could do more than Edwards, Richardson, Biden, and Kucinich combined.

Obama or Clinton have it in their power to kill this bill, the others do not.

I am unprepared to differentiate between democrats such as Dodd and Dianne Feinstein. When TelCom immunity is made law, I wipe my hands of the party forever.

i am unprepared to see how that makes any sense at all. if dodd does everything in his power to stop it but fails to stop it because of other democrats (and republicans), you will wipe your hands of all democrats including dodd (and any democrats who supported him)? your logic is staggering.

this is just appalling!

why are sessions and hatch so afraid of the judicial branch of the federal government? what a bunch of chickenshits they are pretending to be.

if the telecoms did nothing wrong, the courts are fully capable of determining that. it is NOT the place of any other branch of government - not the executive, not the legislature - to make that determination. if no law was broken, no problem. any financial burden the telecoms might have to carry to defend themselves against 'frivolous lawsuits' is a very very small price to pay for THE RULE OF LAW.

the truth is: the legislative branch (as is their constitutional responsibility) wrote the relevant laws. the telecoms BROKE those laws. the executive branch encouraged (or even ordered) the telecoms to break those laws. understandably, the executive branch is failing to enforce those laws according to it's constitutional responsibility. and here we have the legislature wanting to prevent the judicial branch from performing it's own constitutional responsibility of interpreting the law and holding those accountable who have broken the law.

talk about unpatriotic. talk about unamerican.

and obama and clinton and biden DO nothing. thanks for destroying america, gang. you've been a big help. great job!

For what it is worth, Commentator, I think your point is well taken. There are things that the non-Senatorial candidates for president could (and should) do to facilitate Dodd's efforts, even if they cannot take to the Senate floor or vote against cloture.

Anoymouse wrote on December 17, 2007 4:42 PM:

Q: Why is Dodd alone on this one?

A: The dems and the repubs are one in the same.

How many more FISA like fiascos are needed to convince those Ken and Barbie pretend types otherwise?

The ridiculous Kabuki to support the inane proposition that a real and meaningful difference exists between repubs and dems is an exercise in futility that this and other progressive and conservative blogs participate in day after day, even in the face of solid demonstrable and tangible evidence to the contrary.

What a fucking joke!

So far, everyone's statements of condemnation towards Clinton, Obama and Biden are quite premature. Currently there is no filibuster. The Amendment period has not even occurred yet and Dodd's Amendment to strike Telecom Immunity still has a chance of passing, which is now what is being discussed in the "pre"-discussion time prior to Amendments being heard after which the discussion period where the actual filibuster will occur will begin. It is at that point (as well as voting for Dodd's Amendment) that Biden, Clinton and Obama need to be present and fight with Dodd the good fight.

Thank you for the correction Michael. You are quite right.

6:15pm: Orin Hatch predictably champions the pragmatism of the new FISA bill, claiming that intelligence officials would only dream of surveying Americans if they had probable cause to believe that the American is a foreign terrorist.

Hatch says the new FISA bill demands warrants in order to tap terrorist communications.

good call doctor jay, reid throwing dodd a bone.

Dr. Jay,

Why did Reid cave? Two words: Yucca Mountain.

Michael Caine wrote on December 17, 2007 8:18 PM:

You may be correct that Biden, Hillary and/or Obama were key in this temporary victory I hope so, but I do not know.

Only one wearing pie in the sky by and by dem goggles would say so without being in the know any more than someone wearing a tinfoil hat arguing the contrary.

All that can be said clearly at this point is that Dodd is a champion and deserves kudos for his upholding principle (not principal).

Folks,

The bill has been temporarily tabled, but how come no update on this on the tpm site??? Obviously there wasnt much of a reaction on NY Times or Wapo, but I would have thought TPM would have highlighted this rare show of backbone. Glenn Greenwald has a nice writeup about the days action on salon and a link to a speech by Sen Fiengold.

Anyway, keep up the good work and maybe more folks in Congress will be able to get some backbone.....

-in TX