The following may, or may not, be an emailed response to inquiries about an important Senate vote followed very closely at DailyKos. If you, like the person who placed the original inquiry, are deeply concerned that the Democrats in the Senate are putting expediency ahead of progressive beliefs in a misguided attempt to gain political advantage, perhaps it will offer some comfort that the Senate leadership does actually know what they are doing.
-- Wayward Son
From: XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
To: XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
Subject: Re: Concerns expressed over upcoming Senate vot...
First, I would like to thank you for contacting us regarding the upcoming vote in the Senate. We are always glad to hear from concerned citizens on the important issue of the day, especially one with such broad-reaching implications. However, it is clear from your comments that you are operating under some misunderstandings about how things work in the United States Senate.
If we had a clear filibuster-proof majority, obviously we would be moving forward much more quickly on these issues, and you could be certain that our actions would be true to your progressive beliefs. But that is not the reality in which we work in the Senate. As Democrats, we are constantly pressured into evaluating many different factors in deciding which course to take. How will the American people respond? Will it make us look weak on a particular issue? Will it affect the next Congressional, or Presidential election? Will we be called obstructionists for using the filibuster? Will it provide election material for the Republicans and their 527 allies? We simply cannot afford to base a vote solely on the merits of the bill in front of us.
In addition, accommodations must always be made to satisfy the more conserative members of our caucus. A unified Republican Party means that only a few Democrats can side with the opposition, and control the debate. We must constantly offer concessions to the Republicans in trade for moving forward on bills that matter to us. Do you understand that we could not have legislation about things like migrant worker's rights, and green energy subsidies, without providing the Repbulicans with accomplishments of their own in equal measure? This is reality, and it is how Washington works. Those such as you who sit on the outside, and criticize how this government gets things done, simply do not have the knowledge necessary to make that call.
We in the Senate would certainly like to extend a full debate on the issue, and make sure that all viewpoints are heard. But unfortunately we are under some pressures from the White House, and from the House of Representatives, to move forward quickly on this bill. It is likely, as the weekend approaches, that we will be forced to side with the Republicans and shorten debate over the wishes of some Democratic Senators. Although we respect their views, and honor the tradition of Senatorial review, we cannot be placed in a position of being portrayed as being obstructionists. I am sure the House has done a fine job of reviewing the language in the bill, and proposing the necessary amendments. A slower process would just delay the inevitable, so any calls for us to take more time off the calendar in reviewing this bill is simply not being realistic.
Although it may seem as though the issue under discussion has two clearly defined sides, the reality is that there are many possible ways to view it. We in the Senate have access to an incredible amount of information that you will never have the ability to review. We have thoroughly reviewed this information, which includes reams of classified intelligence, and a substantial number of Democrats agree with the President that the bill should be passed in order to respond to the real-world challenges we face in a post-9/11 world. Your opinions, as strongly held as they may be, are not based on the in-depth analysis that we have been provided. It is important that you temper your concern over this issue with the knowledge that our decisions are incrementally more informed than anyone outside of government could possibly be.
The President has requested for us to pass a bill that provides authorization for acts he deems necessary for fighting the war on terrorism. He, and the many multi-national corporations he is allied with in this effort, present a strong opposition to changes to this bill, and have repeatedly and publicly made his case that we in the Senate must act promptly. You may disagree with the premise that this authorization has anything to do with terrorism, but the President is able to use his position to broadcast directly to America. We in the Senate do not have that luxury. All that we can do is insert language into the bill that will strictly forbid the office of the President from proceeding in an unlawful manner. Please rest assured that we will guarantee his adherence to the law.
As a Democratic Senator, I understand your frustrations. We will continue to work towards a larger Democratic representation in Congress, and fully expect to recapture the White House in the next election. But a failure to act aggressively in support of this bill would cost us dearly in the next election. It provides our party an electoral advantage by assuming a tougher stance on the issue of terrorism, and has no real risks for our country when you consider the obvious safeguards we have included in the language. We shall turn the tables on the Republicans, and take a campaign issue off the table for our next Presidential candidate. There really is no other option.
Thank you for writing, State Sen. Obama, regarding the upcoming vote on the Authorization For Use Of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution of 2002. Hopefully, I have helped to explain why Democrats should allow this vote to proceed, and why many Democrats shall vote for it and help it to pass.
If you have any additional concerns regarding issues that affect the people of Illinois, please let us know.
Signed,
Sen. Tom Daschle
Senate Majority Leader
10-10-2002