The 109th Congress has begun, its Republican majority in place and ready to begin its mighty task of bold new economic reform and supporting the president’s war against terror. That said, much of members’ time has already been held up by political posturing from the left, particularly involving the nomination debates of Condoleezza Rice and Alberto Gonzales for the posts Secretary of State and Attorney General, respectively. Each the first members of their respective minority group ever to be nominated to hold these lofty positions, Democrats have spent the time throughout their nomination proceedings lambasting administration policy, making wild claims in an effort to say anything that could improve their already dismal political position.
From the ever-illustrious Sen. Robert Byrd of West Virginia (former Ku Klux Klan member) to everyone’s favorite out-of-touch California senator, Barbara Boxer, Democrats lined up their leftist members in an almost parade-like fashion to attack Rice on highly specious grounds. In one of the most rigorous questionings in the history of Cabinet nomination proceedings, Rice answered almost 200 questions in testimony, and roughly the same in writing as well, all so that her inevitable acceptance could be delayed needlessly. The futility of their obstructionism never even kept private, many senators began their statements acknowledging the likelihood of her eventual approval. With a majority of Democrats joining with Republicans to approve Rice, only 13 senators voted against her.
This is not, however, to say that questioning Cabinet appointees is unnecessary or futile. It is to say that the rude manner in which Democrats used Rice’s nomination as an opportunity to take potshots at Bush is little more than Congressional obstructionism, the kind that got former Senate Minority Leader Tom Daschle of South Dakota thrown out of office by his constituents, the first Senate leader to have lost re-election in a half-century. Senators up for re-election in 2006 would be wise to remember that voters demand action, not stalling. Obvious to everyone, Rice is simply going to continue the policy of the administration as set by Bush. Debate over this fact is meaningless, and only serves as a way for members of the minority to stall progress and navel-gaze.
However, one Senator is already beginning to stand out from the crowd amongst the Democrats as a symbol of what his party once represented: Barack Obama of Illinois. In questioning Rice, Obama actually asked questions that were not personal attacks, balancing his personal biases toward effective policy with reasoned understanding. Calm yet stern, Obama did not waver on his tough questioning, but never resorted to the malicious and callous nature of his cohorts, preferring instead to actually try and learn from Rice about some of the most important issues facing our nation, such as nuclear proliferation and international credibility.
Democrats, you should be proud to claim Senator Obama as one of your own.
In addition to Obama’s wise questioning, other Democratic senators were wise to grill Alberto Gonzales for his unclear responses regarding torture.
Republicans, take note: defending torture in any capacity is a recipe for electoral defeat. Period. If it’s hard to convince voters of nuance involving congressional proceedings, imagine the difficulty in defending certain acts of coercion easily bordering on a common sense definition of torture. It’s not just poor policy — it’s bad politics. Democrats own this end of the debate, and it shows.
Alberto Gonzales, the man chosen to be the lead prosecutor for the people of the United States of America, found it difficult to condemn torture. This fact alone should be somewhat disturbing, not only in regard to the moral clarity involving such an issue at the more general level, but also the ineffectiveness of torture as an information extracting procedure. Information gained through torture is highly questionable given the nature of the coercion. Almost more importantly for Republicans, they must do a better job to convince those wary of Attorney General John Ashcroft that Gonzales is any different. Defending torture isn’t the best way to go about this.
And so the 109th Congress begins with both hope and trepidation, the stakes high and the possibilities for the future even higher. Two historic Cabinet appointment debates later, we can already begin to see how this Congress will likely play out. With a newly strengthened majority, Republicans will likely face stiff opposition from the more vitriolic leftists, they must also be wary of succumbing to the pitfalls of hubris: a difficult task, indeed. Power unchecked is a recipe for tyranny, and Democrats must fight against fully insulated thinking from the majority.
Hopefully, both sides of the aisle can follow in the footsteps Obama has already made in such a short time — question the opposition, but recognize the fact that not only are those who disagree with Democrats human beings as well, they are reasonable ones at that. Reasonable people can disagree; rational people discuss why. Let’s see where the Democrats end up.
Zach Stern ([email protected]) is a senior majoring in political science.
