This week, Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee Chairman Tom Harkin (D-IA) said that he expects President Obama to recess appoint former AFL-CIO and SEIU lawyer Craig Becker to the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) after Congress adjourns at the end of the week. Becker’s nomination — as well as those of two other NLRB nominees — have been held up by conservatives in Congress.

The administration has been hinting for a while that a recess appointment for Becker is coming, and today Senate Republicans — who are using Becker’s nomination as a proxy battle over the Employee Free Choice Act (EFCA) — fired off a letter to Obama making their displeasure with these developments known:

We are writing to urge you not to overturn the bipartisan vote against the nomination of Craig Becker to be a Member of the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) through a recess appointment. To do so would bypass the advice and consent traditions of the Senate…Taking this action would install a rejected nominee for an appointed term to the NLRB, setting an unfortunate precedent for all future nominations and future administrations.

Sen. John McCain (R-AZ), one of the principal authors of the letter, added that “if this administration chooses to recess appoint Mr. Becker, it would be just another example of putting the will of one special interest group over the will of the American people.”

These are pretty strong words from the GOP, claiming that Becker is a “rejected nominee,” who was voted down due to “the will of the American people.” You’d almost think he faced an up-or-down vote sometime.

However, if you thought that an up-or-down vote was ever held on Becker’s nomination, you’d be wrong. His nomination was filibustered, like so many others, as a motion to file cloture on his nomination was defeated by a 33-52 vote (with 15 senators missing the vote), eight short of the 60 needed to proceed to debate and a final vote.

So even if all of the non-voting members had voted no, Becker still would have received the approval of a majority of the Senate. But thanks to the Republicans using procedural votes to gum things up, Becker remains in limbo. And of course, conservatives didn’t seem to take umbrage with President George W. Bush’s multitude of recess appointments to the NLRB.

The NLRB has been in the spotlight this week because a case was heard by the Supreme Court that could invalidate more than 600 rulings that the board made while only two of its five members were in place. (The technical dispute revolves around whether or not two members constitutes a quorum). During oral arguments before the court, Chief Justice John Roberts directly asked why Obama has not simply solved the NLRB’s problem with recess appointments. And with the unprecedented obstruction that the Republicans are engaging in, that’s exactly the right question to ask.

Last month, Sen. Jim Bunning (R-KY) and a handful of his Republican allies caused quite the controversy by obstructing for days an extension of unemployment benefits that were set to expire. Bunning himself said “tough sh*t” to Democrats seeking a unanimous consent agreement to extend the benefits. He was subsequently hailed as a “national hero,” by Sen. Jim DeMint (R-SC) and earned the praise of Sen. John Cornyn (R-TX) and Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-AL). “I respect him for the courage he’s showed,” said Sessions.

When Bunning finally relented, a 30-day extension of enhanced benefits was successfully passed. But now those 30 days are coming to a close, and Republicans are “lining up” to play the same game again, and “leading the charge this time around will likely be” Sen. Tom Coburn (R-OK):

Coburn said it’s “highly doubtful” he’d let Democrats quickly pass an extension this week to keep benefits going until May 5 — if the $10 billion isn’t offset with spending cuts…At a closed-door lunch Tuesday, Coburn and several other GOP senators said they’d battle the Democrats if they pile the costs of the bill onto the deficit, several attendees later said…[P]ublicly — from moderates to GOP leaders to the hard-core conservatives — Republicans told POLITICO Wednesday that they agree to fight the efforts this time.

Various senators, including Sen. Susan Collins (R-ME) and Sen. George LeMieux (R-FL), have hinted that they will help Coburn oppose the extension, unless an offset is found. “At some point, enough is enough,” LeMieux said.

Of course, as the National Employment Law Project’s Judy Conti explained, offsetting unemployment benefits is just bad economics. “Every economist from every side of the political spectrum will tell you that unemployment benefits are most stimulative when they are not offset,” she said. “In the history of the unemployment program, we have never off set these programs.” If the GOP was honestly concerned about finding offsets, then they should advocate paying for the extended benefits over the long-term (10 years, for instance). But instead, they favor redirecting stimulus spending, defeating the whole purpose of taking steps like these.

Obstructionism is not really surprising coming from Coburn — who is called “Dr. No” — as he has openly admitted “I love gridlock.” But the extent to which the rest of the Republican caucus has embraced procedural tricks to prevent Congress from functioning is quite appalling. For instance, this week the GOP stopped two days of hearings, including those on national security matters, just because they were upset that health care reform passed.