Comments on: Stevens confirms he placed secret hold on bill.

By: Parrotlover77

Parrotlover77 — Thu, 31 Aug 2006 18:02:11 +0000

I understand the “secret hold” option better than I did last week… But why doesn’t one Democratic senator do the same for Bush’s assinine Republican bills? Why are we only hearing about this more now for something both parties agree is a good idea?

By: Bridge of Lies

Bridge of Lies — Thu, 31 Aug 2006 13:39:01 +0000

Ted Stevens couldn’t carry Lamont’s water.
Ted Stevens can’t hold his own water.

Bill Frist should be publicly ridiculed for even considering honoring
this secret hold. My God, it sounds like a fricken’ fraternity house,
allowing shit to happen & hoping the Dean doesn’t find out.
Pathetic.
Dishonorable.
Unamerican.
Sadly, this describes those in power today.
Wake up, America, before they pull the curtain on freedom.

By: Wayne A. Schneider

Wayne A. Schneider — Thu, 31 Aug 2006 11:55:09 +0000

Well I, for one, think a Ted Stevens filibuster would make for hilarious TV viewing. It would give Jon Stewart and Stephen Colbert material to last a month. We’ve all seen how incoherent Stevens is when he (supposedly) has had his nap. Imagine how crantankerous he’ll be when he’s into his 9th hour of non-stop talking. I think the country could use the good laugh. And if it keeps the Senate from enabling anything else of Bush’s agenda, then so much the better. I say, “Bring it on!” Stevens getting cranky on TV – Bush not getting his agenda – it’s a win-win for the American people.

By: Marie

Marie — Thu, 31 Aug 2006 01:07:14 +0000

Sen. Stevens has taken that bridge to nowhere – he is looking for his brain. He knows he left it somewhere. Maybe it’s clogging the “tubes” of the internet.
He is an old man, slipping into senility (which frequently means behaving like a child) and he should be sent home. He gets pork barrel funding for home state projects to the detriment of the nation as a whole.

In learning a bit about “holds” in the Senate, I think he had to have the cooperation of Frist and a few others of equal power.
Selfish thinking, self-serving action.

By: Sharon Cox

Sharon Cox — Wed, 30 Aug 2006 23:25:09 +0000

Stevens reminds me of rummy, screaming, spoiled, vindictive old white men that should not hold any office..Remember when he threw his little fit last spring on the senate floor..Had a tantrum because his Alaska drilling and bridge to no where except his wife’s property was being blocked…..He told all the senators then he would never forget what and who voted against him and they could never count on him again….Bla,Bla, Bla…

After watching this entire mess for year’s we definetly need to get rid of all these old men who only care about their own self intrests…They have been in bed with all the big corporations, lobbiests and big money so long they have forgotten the constitution, our country and her people…That goes for the left, right and center…If they aren’t doing their job they need to be voted out…….Blessings….Peace

By: dlet

dlet — Wed, 30 Aug 2006 20:55:34 +0000

Hey Stevens…hold this…secretly though…

By: suggie

suggie — Wed, 30 Aug 2006 20:53:03 +0000

Stevens should be hung by his gahonas for this!

By: Hardy Haberman

Hardy Haberman — Wed, 30 Aug 2006 20:42:03 +0000

This “hold” has one purpose and one purpose only, to protect the pigs at the trough. The Senators getting fat from the pork are trying to hide. In the case of Stevens, that would have to be some camoflage, since he is one of the worst of the porkbarrel politicians.

By: kindness

kindness — Wed, 30 Aug 2006 20:16:48 +0000

Using the “hold” technique has been in Senate tradition for a very long time.

What’s unusual is the other Senator’s allowing the person who placed the hold to be identified. Ususally, it’s kept secret.

It’s an archane institution with many traditions dating back centuries. Thank god it isn’t run like the House though.

By: bones

bones — Wed, 30 Aug 2006 20:00:54 +0000

A “hold” was recently used by Hilary Clinton to block business on approving the new FDA appointee until Plan B was approved. Miraculously, and suddenly Plan B after being on hold for years was approved in less than 72 hours. I don’t mind a hold but then you should have to defend it if called on it. Clinton has a reasonable defense I think most would understand, “Tubes” Stevens would be embarrased if called to defend his hold on the floor of the Senate.

By: Mroom

Mroom — Wed, 30 Aug 2006 19:57:01 +0000

Snipped from Muckraker: http://www.tpmmuckraker.com/archives/001435.php

It could be known by others, but according to practice a hold is placed merely by telling your party’s Senate leader or secretary. That’s the word from Don Ritchie, associate Senate historian. (Vice President Cheney, who is also the President of the Senate, cannot place a hold on a bill, Ritchie confirmed.)

Oddly, proponents of “secret holds” believe they’re not a minor quirk of Senate procedure, but actually an important part of what keeps the Senate functioning, Ritchie told me. Despite this, the practice of honoring secret holds has no basis in law. It has no basis in Senate rules. And it has no basis in Senate precedents — a byzantine collection of many hundreds of rules developed over time by lawmakers, collected and codified by the Senate parliamentarian.

In fact, the practice was briefly banished in 1997.

By: Mroom

Mroom — Wed, 30 Aug 2006 19:54:09 +0000

6 and others asking: there’s a good piece on TPMucraker that explains the secret hold option. the link is http://www.tpmmuckraker.com/archives/001435.php

By: hotfroggy!

hotfroggy! — Wed, 30 Aug 2006 19:53:52 +0000

even israel tape records their meetings for public scrutiny. wtf!? why doesn’t the congress demand the same!

By: ann

ann — Wed, 30 Aug 2006 19:47:15 +0000

It’s “our money,” and I’d like to know how they are spending it. I don’t think that’s too much to ask.

By: dlet

dlet — Wed, 30 Aug 2006 19:44:51 +0000

Frist should be hammered on this by everyone for not putting this to the floor with an overwhelming majority behind it. A hold is only a request by a senator and the Majority Leader can choose to deny that request.

By: Abby

Abby — Wed, 30 Aug 2006 19:43:03 +0000

Isn’t this like one of your junior managers denying your right to examine the company records? I know this is legal, but for God’s sake, how and why is this legal? What better proof that the country belongs to elected officials and NOT to the people.

By: oldtree

oldtree — Wed, 30 Aug 2006 19:39:30 +0000

placing a hold is illegal and no one can explain why it is allowed by the senate. it is a “good ole boy” holdover one is lead to believe. Trent Lott did it whenever he knew he had something to hide, or would lose a vote.

our senators are criminals, line em up. we obviously have nothing to lose. As long as the executive branch is served first.

what the hell happend to my country?

By: Jesus Christ God of WAR

Jesus Christ God of WAR — Wed, 30 Aug 2006 19:39:28 +0000

#10 – Ah. I see.

What will WingNuts do next?

By: Jesus Christ God of WAR

Jesus Christ God of WAR — Wed, 30 Aug 2006 19:38:24 +0000

#6 – …How is it that a lone senator can exert a unilateral covert filibuster on a bill???

Honestly, Iâ€™m asking. Does anyone know? And doesnâ€™t this seem like a bit of a problem?

Indeed. Excellent questions. What happened here? How is such a thing possible?

By: dlet

dlet — Wed, 30 Aug 2006 19:38:22 +0000

Trip,
I did some searching and got this.

hold – An informal practice by which a Senator informs his or her floor leader that he or she does not wish a particular bill or other measure to reach the floor for consideration. The Majority Leader need not follow the Senatorâ€™s wishes, but is on notice that the opposing Senator may filibuster any motion to proceed to consider the measure.

So he has to have the Majority Leader hold this from vote. So this is not just the crazy loon from the north but more Repugs are involved. And if only one senator doesn’t want this bill to pass then there is no threat of a filibuster so the Majority Leader should put it to the floor. We’ll see.