Should Sen. Byrd switch to the Republican party?

[0rganism]

This may seem like an oddball question, but consider this. Byrd has been in the Senate since 1959, and sits on the appropriations committee where he is the ranking minority member. The current chairman of the Appropriations Committee is Ted Stevens (R-AK), who has been a senator for all of 35 years -- a mere whippersnapper compared to Byrd. Senate rules would ordinarily give the chairmanship of the committee to the majority party's most senior member.

No legislation gets out of committee without the chairman's approval. Something to think about, eh?

Also, as a minor point, Byrd is well-positioned to become President pro-tempore of the Senate, if he is in the majority party. This would move him up in line for succession to the presidency.

Flame on.

[dogman]

1. By that reasoning we should all switch.

With one party rule the majority in that party could move it back from the far right. It would work but it's still a sickening cocept. Before this is all over, it might be the only option.

[JohnKleeb]

2. that sounds good on paper

but you do realize if they switched to the republican party, the republicans would have a challenger in the primaries for the senate, its not like someone switches parties and boom they're safe, I believe a republican from upstate new york who switched to the dems lost in the dem primary.

[dogman]

4. ALL

voters included. One party rule.

[JohnKleeb]

6. I see but

They will challenge those dems in the primaries, and it does happen.

[dogman]

8. Vote for the moderate Rethug.

Move them left over time. Keyes could not get full Rethug support. Not all are extreme RW.

[JohnKleeb]

12. of course not all are like keyes but if a dem switched to the republican

party, you're crazy if you think the republicans wouldnt recruit someone to run against him in the primaries, primaries arent just for presidential elections.

[dogman]

21. I see we are talking different points here.

I'm not speaking to the OP as far as one person. I was saying we all join the GOP and change it from within. I live in a precinct that is 80% Rethug genetically. There is no change in that coming soon. These people's minds are not closed to ideas, they are closed to Democratic ideas. If I truly wanted to change things locally I would have to become one of them.

[0rganism]

7. However, if the electorate switches too...

we could seriously fuck up their primaries. They'd have a couple conservative candidates to choose from, and we'd become a significant voting bloc for a single liberal ex-Democrat. Effectively, the primary would become the deciding election, as it is for house races in single-party-dominated parts of the country.

It's a long shot, but we might actually be better off as a one-party state.

[JohnKleeb]

11. many states are closed primaries

so it may not work.

[0rganism]

23. In those states, the electorate will have to re-register as GOP

On the bright side, we'll have a better chance of our votes getting counted.

[genius]

15. What if Kennedy did likewise. What would his standing be?

[0rganism]

20. Senior member of the Judiciary committee, possibly displacing Orrin Hatch

Another key spot, methinks.

Ted has been in the Senate nearly as long as Byrd.

[JohnKleeb]

27. since '62

I believe. Shame we didn't regain the senate whether you liked who we had or not, head of the judiciary commitee, Kennedy would have been very good.

[genius]

38. Should we suggest this infiltration. They could still fillibuster

And they would have to grant Dems a certain number of seats. These guys would just be filling Republican spots.

[CrownPrinceBandar]

3. Bad idea..............................

While I admire the guile and pluck of your suggestion, it would be really bad for WV. Byrd is one of the few individuals that are keeping Repub leadership at bay here in WV. If anyone wants to return WV to the blue stronghold that it once was, please keep Byrd where he is.

[0rganism]

16. True, it is speculative, & would take a lot of tricky maneuvering to work

I still think we're going to have to look seriously at how to use procedure to advance some form of progressive policies and halt the most egregious abuses of the neo-conservative movement. Maybe this is not the way to achieve it, but we are at a crossroads where our legacy strategies have failed. We need some leverage to hold on to as much of the New Deal and Great Society policy as we can, while the GOP ops do their utmost to take it away.

[CrownPrinceBandar]

26. So true........................

We've been there in the New Deal and Great Society before, I truly believe we can get there again. But I think there is a dangerous level of divisive talk right now. But, in the end, words are just words.

[novadem]

5. I don't think they would take him. His KKK backround

would make him an immediate liability. I don't think he's good for our party either. He needs to retire.

[CrownPrinceBandar]

9. "His KKK background would make him an immediate liability"..............

Ancient history. He recanted that shit over 20 years ago. He was/is deeply ashamed of his involvement in the KKK. He entered the Klan at a young age at the suggestion of his adopted father. Please quit trying to divide Democrats with a needless, jingoistic wedge issue.

[JVS]

14. It might be ancient history, but if he were to become a GOPer...

I would bet that that background would pop back up and fill the pages of DU

[CrownPrinceBandar]

18. You are correct........

But I wonder how many folks around here would like to have their entire image characterized by any misdeeds in their past, despite how much good they have accomplished. That said, I will not give a Byrd a pass on his KKK past, but I will weigh his record of strong Dem leadership and ruthless chastisement of President Bush into account as well.

[JVS]

19. Nobody would like to have that done.

But very few are willing to reciprocate the consideration that they'd like to be shown

[CrownPrinceBandar]

24. Sad, ain't it.

[JVS]

25. Yup n/t

[Zuni]

36. Far too true.

I believe we should forgive those who were wrong who have tried to make right, like Bob Byrd

[Zuni]

32. I am willing to allow for repentant Kluxers---everyone has made mistakes

He was a poor white boy who was misled and learned the error of his ways.
Unlike Trent Lott.....

[Zuni]

31. Harry Truman was also a member of the KKK---for 1 day

He went to a meeting in 1920 or so, because many white southerners were doing it and was so disgusted he became an immediate opponent of the Klan for the rest of his life. They even put out a contract on his head in the 1920s.
Robert Byrd also repented. Shame on those who use GOP talking points to slander a decent senator who cares more about this country than most of them while making excuses for real racist bigots like Trent Lott or Jesse Helms

[tritsofme]

35. To me, all three were cut from the same cloth

for lack of a better term.

[Zuni]

37. Who? Byrd, Helms and Thurmond?

I think Byrd is far more repentant, and in many ways far wiser than the other two.

[0rganism]

10. If they took Strom Thurmond, they can take Robert Byrd

Of course, Thurmond switched during the Civil Rights reshuffling that turned the Democratic states of 1896 into the republican states of 1968, and vice versa. It may be a harder sell at this time, and there's no doubt that the GOP are well aware of the implications of such a move.

[Zuni]

34. But Robert Byrd is on our side on many issues

Strom Thurmond was not

[genius]

17. They wouldn't have a choice

[genius]

13. They might not trust him and they might not give him a good position.

[tritsofme]

22. Your premise is wrong

There is no law that forces committee chairmanships to go to the most senior member, the majority leadership can basically choose who they want to.

[0rganism]

28. There are rules of procedure

Quoting wikipedia,

'Control of Senate committees is almost always by seniority within the majority party, but there is now a four-term limit. Hubert Humphrey once described this privilege as the “most sacred cow in the legislative zoo.”'

So unless the republicans change the rules of procedure or find a way to negate a senator's seniority (e.g., redefining it as seniority within a given caucus), it would shake things up significantly.

[Freddie Stubbs]

29. You didn't seem to read the 'almost always' part

There was actaully discussion of deneying Specter the chairmanship of the Judiciary Committee after his comments regarding Bush's judicial appointments. Specter then backtracked.

[0rganism]

33. I did, but took it to primarily relate to the four-term limits.

However, in light of Specter's difficulties, you're interpretation is more likely correct.

I think Byrd could make a convincing case for a change of position, though.

[tritsofme]

30. Specter as another person noted is not guaranteed chairmanship

of the Judiciary Committee, even though he has the seniority to get it.

In the end, its Bill Frist's decision.