Elizabeth Warren was integral in the creation of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, a brand new bureaucratic agency that helps regulate Wall Street in an effort to do what it's title suggests, protect the consumer. President Obama, instead of nominating Warren to head up this new bureau, nominated former Ohio AG Richard Cordray.
Why in the world would Obama not choose to nominate the very woman who rails against Wall Street and loves to talk about income inequality to run the CFPB? I mean Elizabeth Warren talked income inequality before it was cool. The short answer: the filibuster.
It is common practice for the minority party in the Senate to use each and every trick in the book to block any nomination by the President. This recent precedent extends to federal judges, bureaucrats, and the like. Generally this helps to somehow stall the President's agenda or just kill time before they hopefully lose. The filibuster, or the threat of one, is the main reason that this distortion of democracy can even take place.
The fact that nominees who are completely qualified to hold a position are not confirmed because they happen to be of the other party is ridiculous. Political disagreement is not a reason to deny confirmation to a qualified individual. Both parties do it when the other is in power, and this ridiculousness illuminates the need for serious filibuster reform. Something that will hopefully gain more much needed traction soon.
As a side note, the Republicans still won't allow Richard Cordray's nomination to pass mostly because they are politically opposed to the CFPB even functioning and the best way for it not to function is to not have anyone heading it up. Democracy in America just as Tocqueville saw it my friends!
So that's the background and here's the practical problem. Elizabeth Warren, is a very liberal Democrat who talks Wall Street and income inequality better than pretty much any liberal in the country, and the state of Massachusetts is one of the most liberal states in the nation. When Ted Kennedy died, a moderate Republican, Scott Brown, won his seat. Despite Brown's immense popularity, Massachusetts remains an extremely blue state and his seat, while it should have been relatively safe due to his popularity and unlikely victory back in 2010, now is in serious jeopardy of flipping.
Why you may ask? It's because after Obama spurned Elizabeth Warren, due to her inability to get past a Republican filibuster, decided to become a candidate for the United States Senate in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. The only way an incumbent like Brown loses is when a credible challenger like Warren arises (she can raise money, she's famous, and she's pretty damn popular with the liberal base, a base that's strong in her state).
So in a ridiculous twist of fate, the Senate decided that Elizabeth Warren couldn't head up a bureaucratic agency and now she may join their ranks. Which seems more powerful to you running one of the hundreds of agencies or being one of 100 United States Senators? I'll help you out; it's having a Senate seat.
Elizabeth Warren is more than qualified to run the CFPB, and the Senate better stop the craziness and the minority party ought to begin confirming the qualified before more of their spurned enemies decide to pose an existential threat to a member of their party like Warren has. Brown now has been forced to look for ways to moderate himself and play down his conservatism (today he broke with the house on the one year vs. two month deal situation and he will continue to show himself as an independent more and more). And while this was certainly going to be in the Brown playbook anyway, we will certainly see him do it much more than some conservatives (like me) may like.
Republicans are in a position of power to take back the Senate; they only need six seats! But they can't throw away their own seats in the process. Politics is a rough and tumble game and I understand that, but mistakes like Warren can't happen. And it's embarrassing that Warren wasn't confirmed and that this whole situation has even arisen.
However there really is just one way to protect against future similar mistakes and ridiculous political moves; filibuster reform to help stop the craziness on Capitol Hill is the only way.
No comments:
Post a Comment