If Liebermann switches to GOP, does this affect committees for the 110th?

[LSK]

Does anyone know for sure? I saw a poster suggest it doesnt. I always thought it did.

[cali]

1. it does, but he won't. n/t

[Lex]

2. Liebermann hasn't announced he's switching as a fact

has he?

[hlthe2b]

4. no.. it is a threat... blackmail... per usual

:eyes:

[yardwork]

8. Hi Lex!

I'm a regular DUer again!

:woohoo:

[Lex]

15. Nice!

:thumbsup:

[bpeale]

16. if he hasn't announced it

they should strip him of his seniority anyway for making repeated threats. no supposed independent or supposed dem should be able to threaten the senate and get away with it. randi rhodes just announced that this was true on her show.

[LSparkle]

3. I'm afraid so -- it'll then be 50/50 and Swingin Dick casts deciding vote

Meaning ... no more Senate Majority Leader Reid.

(This is even with Tim Johnson's return.)

[LSK]

6. no more Chairs such as Leahy, Boxer, Biden, Levin

Inhofe would chair the Environmental Committee again.

[LSparkle]

11. PERISH the thought ... talk about dashed hopes

I love that we have the House (and Speaker Pelosi) but I'd be absolutely CRUSHED if we lose control of the Senate ...

UGH! Majority leader McCHINLESS? UGH! DOUBLE UGH! TRIPLE UGH!

:puke:

[Crabby Appleton]

17. it would then be 50 R, 49 D 1 Ind

Senator Bernard Sanders of Vermont was elected as an Independent. Reid would be out, Rs could put Lieberman on any committee they wanted.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bernie_Sanders

[LSparkle]

22. But since Sanders caucuses with the Dems, that makes it 50/50

It's sick but we've been relying all along on Holy Joe to keep his promise to caucus with us that gave us the majority ... and now he knows he's the "kingmaker" (RETCH!).

I wish there were some pledge that Independents have to take at the beginning of a session of Congress saying who they intend to caucus with, and that there would be some repercussion if they try to violate it ... ????

[yardwork]

5. Of course it does. If we lose the majority, we lose all the chairs

If the Republicans regain the majority in the Senate, they get to chair all the committees and they get majority vote on all the committees. They set the agenda and determine what the committees do, which bills get to the floor and which die in committee.

I think that Joe is bluffing, though.

[PhilipShore]

25. Yes but...

think of all the "upset and angry" Dems that will go to the Polls, and vote out the Dems or Repukes --that are like Lieberman in the next election.

In the long run it would only help Dems.

[hlthe2b]

7. You might want to edit your sigline... to avoid some

DUers having premature heart attacks. It is just an ongoing extortionistic threat at this point...

[LSK]

10. you mean my thread title and done

[hlthe2b]

12. right , I meant subjectline....... thanks...

[Nutmegger]

9. LIEber/LoserMan will switch

but not at this time. He will in 2008.

But if he were to switch now, that would give the majority back the the pukes and they would be the ones setting the agenda.

[RiverStone]

13. This seems to sum it up...

http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1592758,00.html

* * * * *

I'll be thrilled when our Senate majority is enough (in 08) to render Loserman's influence irrelevant!

[bpeale]

18. would that his CT constituents could impeach him for

not representing them as they wished to be represented. he is only representing himself now.

[RiverStone]

27. I'd really like to hear from just one CT

constituent who voted for Loserman - and now has the guts to admit he/she drank the kool-aid and WANTS to hold Joe accountable for his pandering to the right bullshit and misrepresentation.

[napi21]

14. ABSOLUTELY it affects Committees! The Senate would change to being Puglican!!!!

i don't know where this threat is coming from, but I'm hoping it's just gossip!

[napi21]

19. I was just thinking of something. If Leiberman switched to GOP, he'd lose HIS

chair as head of Homeland Security! That's one of the reasons he stuck with the Dems. The promised him he could maintain his Senate senority and get the Chairmanship. Nawww, Joe's won't switch! Dimb as he is, he's smart enough to know the Pubs won't give himthe benies he has now, andhe IS seflcentered enough to consider that TOP PRIORITY!

[Bucky]

23. Right! Cause no *way* McConnell'd negotiate away one chairmanship just to get control of the Senate

um... right?

[LSparkle]

26. McConnell'd probably kick Warner off Armed Services for HolyJoe

especially after Warner voted against surge resolution ...

[napi21]

32. Don't know. I guess it would depend on what Chair Joe would demand.

I'm still a believer that the Dems could aproach Snow and Collins and ask one or both of them to switch. Both of them almost always side with the Dem positions anyway, and I have to believe they wouldn't be too pleased with Joe's decision!

[Bucky]

20. And not just Lieberman. Bernie Sanders could jump over to organize with them at any moment

:rofl: Ha! I slay me!

[LSparkle]

24. Yeah, when PIGS FLY! Love that Bernie!

I'm sure he's SICK having to share the "Independent" label with LOSERman.....

[LSK]

29. HAHAAHAHA thats a good one!!!

Dont forget to tune into Brunch with Bernie tomorrow on Hartmanns show. :)

[meldroc]

21. It would bring the Senate back under control of the GOP.

Lieberman defecting would have serious consequences. If he caucused with the GOP, then the Senate would be tied 50/50, with Darth Cheney casting the tiebreaker. As a result, the Democrats would lose all the committee chairs, and control over the agenda. Having the chairs is a big deal, because committee chairs can do things like choosing whether to debate & vote on a bill, or to bury it. It would also be serious if another Supreme Court justice retired - with the Democrats controlling the chairs, Bush won't be able to get another raving right-wing authoritarian lunatic confirmed as the new justice - not only would he get voted down, but he wouldn't even get a vote - the appropriate chair wouldn't even bring his nomination up for a vote - Bush would be forced to nominate someone the Democratic party would be willing to tolerate. If the GOP got the chairs, then they would only bring up raving right-wing lunatics up for a vote.

It is very important that we kiss Lieberman's ass enough to keep him from defecting, as distasteful as it is. Hopefully, his chairmanship would be enough to keep him in the party - he'd lose it if he defected to the GOP and they pwned the Senate - he doesn't have seniority in the GOP like he does with the Dems.

[PhilipShore]

30. Kissing his ass will just make voters not want to vote...

It is very important that we kiss Lieberman's ass

The voters want a change, that is why they gave the Dems the House.

The Dems were lucky to get the Senate anyway, if the Dems show courage, they will lose in the short run and not control the senate for a few years -- but gain -- control of it in long run by big numbers --in the next election.

Pelosi and the House -- has been about the only positive practical thing, of the 2006 election.

[no_hypocrisy]

28. You know what this means:

Two more years of Lieberman threatening to switch parties if the dems are going to decide:

1. To stop funding the war or hold up the money;
2. To impeach *, Cheney, Gonzalez, etc.;
3. Make binding resolutions about the "war"; or
4. Diss * in any way,

But wait! That's too passive for Holy Joe. How 'bout this:
Joe starts making demands on the dems. Such as:
1. A puke sponsoring tax cuts and the dems better make sure it gets voted in;
2. The dems fall short of any progressive legislation they draft, creating an appearance of inaction and confusion to the American public;
3. The dems draft and pass an appropriate Iran resolution allowing * to rape that country;
4. Etc.

He's not going to stop at threats for the war funding. Trust me, he'll get more demanding.

I wish there was something to hold over him to cut him off, but I can't come up with anything.

[rodeodance]

31. If he were to jump ship, the ensuing shift of power to Republicans ...............

Lieberman says leaving the Democratic Party is a "very remote possibility." But even that slight ambiguity — and all his cross-aisle flirtation — has proved more than enough to position Lieberman as the Senate's one-man tipping point. If he were to jump ship, the ensuing shift of power to Republicans would scramble the politics of the war in Iraq, undercut the Democrats' national agenda and potentially weaken their hopes for the White House in 2008. Those stakes are high enough to give Lieberman leverage with both parties no matter how slim the chance of his crossing the aisle. Which means Senate leaders aren't worrying only about whether Joe Lieberman will switch parties. They're wondering what, if anything, he plans to do with the power that comes from keeping that possibility alive.

[Initech]

33. Fuck yeah it does!

Not only would it put the senate back in control of the repukes, it would GIVE DICK CHENEY THE TYING VOTE!!! We cant let that happen!

[B Calm]

34. Just as long as we don't give in to his blackmail, let the little SOB

switch. Theirs no point in negotiating with blackmailers, it never ends!

[LSK]

35. so you prefer Sen Inhofe controlling the Environmental Cmte?

:shrug:

[monarch]

36. NO! Everything stays the same.

I have seen the answer several places, Here's one discussion prompted by Sen Johnson's stroke.

"The incapacitation of South Dakota Senator Tim Johnson has put all eyes in Washington on what is normally a little-noticed Senate vote now scheduled for Jan. 4. It is called the "organizing resolution," and is the bit of internal housekeeping that determines how committee memberships will be allotted between the two parties, as well as who will get to serve as chairman and ranking members of each of the panels. These resolutions traditionally stand until the next Congress, even if the makeup of the chamber shifts to put the other party in the majority, which is why precedent would seem to dictate that the Chamber would stay in Democratic hands, even if Johnson is replaced by a Republican." http://www.votelaw.com/blog/archives/004859.html

Someone on another board raised the Jeffords situation, but Jeffords apparently switched before the resolution was adopted.

[ellacott]

37. That's good news. n/t

[PhilipShore]

38. Interesting

[Cessna Invesco Palin]

39. For fuck's sake.

Look...

Lieberman hates "you people." He is getting in a dig, to get you riled up, nothing more. He isn't going anywhere. Anyone who thinks otherwise doesn't know Lieberman.