Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [prezveepsenator] He's The Worst Ever

Expand Messages
  • THOMAS JOHNSON
    I ve been interested about what historians are saying about the current presidency, and here are some of the thoughts I have gleaned. All are paraphrases but
    Message 1 of 9 , May 20, 2007
    • 0 Attachment
      I've been interested about what historians are saying
      about the current presidency, and here are some of the
      thoughts I have gleaned. All are paraphrases but
      accurate to their intent.
      At the two Pulitzer prize-winning Arthur Schlesinger
      Jr. memorial service last month, Schlesinger's
      daughter said the AS Jr. did not consider GW Bush a
      worse president than James Buchanan but added " on a
      good day, " inferring that some days he did.
      Pulitzer Prize candidate HW Brand wrote in the March
      2007 Texas Monthly that in the discussion on whether
      Bush is worse than Buchanan, one would have to say
      that as bad a Buchanan was, his situation was
      inherited, where as Bush' troubles were
      self-inflicted. There are several contributors in the
      article, including Robert Caro and Robert Dallek.
      2004 Buchanan biographer Jean Baker began a talk on
      Cspan in 2004 saying that 'James Buchanan is widely
      considered the worst president in American history..
      at least up until now.' It's my personal guess, that
      her opinion has not improved since this was before
      Katrina, the war going so bad, the NSA spy scandal,
      signing statements, etc.
      I'm not trying to be confrontational and would be
      interested in a sincere discussion on the matter.

      Tom


      --- Ram Lau <ramlau@...> wrote:

      >
      http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/12/01/AR2006120101509.html
      > He's The Worst Ever
      >
      > By Eric Foner
      > Sunday, December 3, 2006; B01
      >
      > Ever since 1948, when Harvard professor Arthur
      > Schlesinger Sr. asked
      > 55 historians to rank U.S. presidents on a scale
      > from "great" to
      > "failure," such polls have been a favorite pastime
      > for those of us who
      > study the American past.
      >
      > Changes in presidential rankings reflect shifts in
      > how we view
      > history. When the first poll was taken, the
      > Reconstruction era that
      > followed the Civil War was regarded as a time of
      > corruption and
      > misgovernment caused by granting black men the right
      > to vote. As a
      > result, President Andrew Johnson, a fervent white
      > supremacist who
      > opposed efforts to extend basic rights to former
      > slaves, was rated
      > "near great." Today, by contrast, scholars consider
      > Reconstruction a
      > flawed but noble attempt to build an interracial
      > democracy from the
      > ashes of slavery -- and Johnson a flat failure.
      >
      > More often, however, the rankings display a
      > remarkable year-to-year
      > uniformity. Abraham Lincoln, George Washington and
      > Franklin D.
      > Roosevelt always figure in the "great" category.
      > Most presidents are
      > ranked "average" or, to put it less charitably,
      > mediocre. Johnson,
      > Franklin Pierce, James Buchanan, Warren G. Harding,
      > Calvin Coolidge
      > and Richard M. Nixon occupy the bottom rung, and now
      > President Bush is
      > a leading contender to join them. A look at history,
      > as well as Bush's
      > policies, explains why.
      >
      > At a time of national crisis, Pierce and Buchanan,
      > who served in the
      > eight years preceding the Civil War, and Johnson,
      > who followed it,
      > were simply not up to the job. Stubborn,
      > narrow-minded, unwilling to
      > listen to criticism or to consider alternatives to
      > disastrous
      > mistakes, they surrounded themselves with sycophants
      > and shaped their
      > policies to appeal to retrogressive political forces
      > (in that era,
      > pro-slavery and racist ideologues). Even after being
      > repudiated in the
      > midterm elections of 1854, 1858 and 1866,
      > respectively, they ignored
      > major currents of public opinion and clung to flawed
      > policies. Bush's
      > presidency certainly brings theirs to mind.
      >
      > Harding and Coolidge are best remembered for the
      > corruption of their
      > years in office (1921-23 and 1923-29, respectively)
      > and for channeling
      > money and favors to big business. They slashed
      > income and corporate
      > taxes and supported employers' campaigns to
      > eliminate unions. Members
      > of their administrations received kickbacks and
      > bribes from lobbyists
      > and businessmen. "Never before, here or anywhere
      > else," declared the
      > Wall Street Journal, "has a government been so
      > completely fused with
      > business." The Journal could hardly have anticipated
      > the even worse
      > cronyism, corruption and pro-business bias of the
      > Bush administration.
      >
      > Despite some notable accomplishments in domestic and
      > foreign policy,
      > Nixon is mostly associated today with disdain for
      > the Constitution and
      > abuse of presidential power. Obsessed with secrecy
      > and media leaks, he
      > viewed every critic as a threat to national security
      > and illegally
      > spied on U.S. citizens. Nixon considered himself
      > above the law.
      >
      > Bush has taken this disdain for law even further. He
      > has sought to
      > strip people accused of crimes of rights that date
      > as far back as the
      > Magna Carta in Anglo-American jurisprudence: trial
      > by impartial jury,
      > access to lawyers and knowledge of evidence against
      > them. In dozens of
      > statements when signing legislation, he has asserted
      > the right to
      > ignore the parts of laws with which he disagrees.
      > His administration
      > has adopted policies regarding the treatment of
      > prisoners of war that
      > have disgraced the nation and alienated virtually
      > the entire world.
      > Usually, during wartime, the Supreme Court has
      > refrained from passing
      > judgment on presidential actions related to national
      > defense. The
      > court's unprecedented rebukes of Bush's policies on
      > detainees indicate
      > how far the administration has strayed from the rule
      > of law.
      >
      > One other president bears comparison to Bush: James
      > K. Polk. Some
      > historians admire him, in part because he made their
      > job easier by
      > keeping a detailed diary during his administration,
      > which spanned the
      > years of the Mexican-American War. But Polk should
      > be remembered
      > primarily for launching that unprovoked attack on
      > Mexico and seizing
      > one-third of its territory for the United States.
      >
      > Lincoln, then a member of Congress from Illinois,
      > condemned Polk for
      > misleading Congress and the public about the cause
      > of the war -- an
      > alleged Mexican incursion into the United States.
      > Accepting the
      > president's right to attack another country
      > "whenever he shall deem it
      > necessary," Lincoln observed, would make it
      > impossible to "fix any
      > limit" to his power to make war. Today, one wishes
      > that the country
      > had heeded Lincoln's warning.
      >
      > Historians are loath to predict the future. It is
      > impossible to say
      > with certainty how Bush will be ranked in, say,
      > 2050. But somehow, in
      > his first six years in office he has managed to
      > combine the lapses of
      > leadership, misguided policies and abuse of power of
      > his failed
      > predecessors. I think there is no alternative but to
      > rank him as the
      > worst president in U.S. history.
      >
      > efoner@...
      >
      > Eric Foner is DeWitt Clinton professor
      >
      > of history at Columbia University.
      >
      >
      >
    • Ram Lau
      Back in 2004 I used to say that GWB would rank at the bottom WITH his great-great-great-grandfather Franklin Pierce (D-NH), but after Katrina I concluded that
      Message 2 of 9 , May 20, 2007
      • 0 Attachment
        Back in 2004 I used to say that GWB would rank at the bottom WITH his
        great-great-great-grandfather Franklin Pierce (D-NH), but after
        Katrina I concluded that he beats Pierce and Harding by at least a levee.

        Make no mistake that Harding was really bad. But he only served two
        years and then died gracefully, so it wasn't nearly as catastrophic as
        how we are having it.


        --- In prezveepsenator@yahoogroups.com, THOMAS JOHNSON <AVRCRDNG@...>
        wrote:
        >
        > I've been interested about what historians are saying
        > about the current presidency, and here are some of the
        > thoughts I have gleaned. All are paraphrases but
        > accurate to their intent.
        > At the two Pulitzer prize-winning Arthur Schlesinger
        > Jr. memorial service last month, Schlesinger's
        > daughter said the AS Jr. did not consider GW Bush a
        > worse president than James Buchanan but added " on a
        > good day, " inferring that some days he did.
        > Pulitzer Prize candidate HW Brand wrote in the March
        > 2007 Texas Monthly that in the discussion on whether
        > Bush is worse than Buchanan, one would have to say
        > that as bad a Buchanan was, his situation was
        > inherited, where as Bush' troubles were
        > self-inflicted. There are several contributors in the
        > article, including Robert Caro and Robert Dallek.
        > 2004 Buchanan biographer Jean Baker began a talk on
        > Cspan in 2004 saying that 'James Buchanan is widely
        > considered the worst president in American history..
        > at least up until now.' It's my personal guess, that
        > her opinion has not improved since this was before
        > Katrina, the war going so bad, the NSA spy scandal,
        > signing statements, etc.
        > I'm not trying to be confrontational and would be
        > interested in a sincere discussion on the matter.
        >
        > Tom
        >
        >
        > --- Ram Lau <ramlau@...> wrote:
        >
        > >
        >
        http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/12/01/AR2006120101509.html
        > > He's The Worst Ever
        > >
        > > By Eric Foner
        > > Sunday, December 3, 2006; B01
        > >
        > > Ever since 1948, when Harvard professor Arthur
        > > Schlesinger Sr. asked
        > > 55 historians to rank U.S. presidents on a scale
        > > from "great" to
        > > "failure," such polls have been a favorite pastime
        > > for those of us who
        > > study the American past.
        > >
        > > Changes in presidential rankings reflect shifts in
        > > how we view
        > > history. When the first poll was taken, the
        > > Reconstruction era that
        > > followed the Civil War was regarded as a time of
        > > corruption and
        > > misgovernment caused by granting black men the right
        > > to vote. As a
        > > result, President Andrew Johnson, a fervent white
        > > supremacist who
        > > opposed efforts to extend basic rights to former
        > > slaves, was rated
        > > "near great." Today, by contrast, scholars consider
        > > Reconstruction a
        > > flawed but noble attempt to build an interracial
        > > democracy from the
        > > ashes of slavery -- and Johnson a flat failure.
        > >
        > > More often, however, the rankings display a
        > > remarkable year-to-year
        > > uniformity. Abraham Lincoln, George Washington and
        > > Franklin D.
        > > Roosevelt always figure in the "great" category.
        > > Most presidents are
        > > ranked "average" or, to put it less charitably,
        > > mediocre. Johnson,
        > > Franklin Pierce, James Buchanan, Warren G. Harding,
        > > Calvin Coolidge
        > > and Richard M. Nixon occupy the bottom rung, and now
        > > President Bush is
        > > a leading contender to join them. A look at history,
        > > as well as Bush's
        > > policies, explains why.
        > >
        > > At a time of national crisis, Pierce and Buchanan,
        > > who served in the
        > > eight years preceding the Civil War, and Johnson,
        > > who followed it,
        > > were simply not up to the job. Stubborn,
        > > narrow-minded, unwilling to
        > > listen to criticism or to consider alternatives to
        > > disastrous
        > > mistakes, they surrounded themselves with sycophants
        > > and shaped their
        > > policies to appeal to retrogressive political forces
        > > (in that era,
        > > pro-slavery and racist ideologues). Even after being
        > > repudiated in the
        > > midterm elections of 1854, 1858 and 1866,
        > > respectively, they ignored
        > > major currents of public opinion and clung to flawed
        > > policies. Bush's
        > > presidency certainly brings theirs to mind.
        > >
        > > Harding and Coolidge are best remembered for the
        > > corruption of their
        > > years in office (1921-23 and 1923-29, respectively)
        > > and for channeling
        > > money and favors to big business. They slashed
        > > income and corporate
        > > taxes and supported employers' campaigns to
        > > eliminate unions. Members
        > > of their administrations received kickbacks and
        > > bribes from lobbyists
        > > and businessmen. "Never before, here or anywhere
        > > else," declared the
        > > Wall Street Journal, "has a government been so
        > > completely fused with
        > > business." The Journal could hardly have anticipated
        > > the even worse
        > > cronyism, corruption and pro-business bias of the
        > > Bush administration.
        > >
        > > Despite some notable accomplishments in domestic and
        > > foreign policy,
        > > Nixon is mostly associated today with disdain for
        > > the Constitution and
        > > abuse of presidential power. Obsessed with secrecy
        > > and media leaks, he
        > > viewed every critic as a threat to national security
        > > and illegally
        > > spied on U.S. citizens. Nixon considered himself
        > > above the law.
        > >
        > > Bush has taken this disdain for law even further. He
        > > has sought to
        > > strip people accused of crimes of rights that date
        > > as far back as the
        > > Magna Carta in Anglo-American jurisprudence: trial
        > > by impartial jury,
        > > access to lawyers and knowledge of evidence against
        > > them. In dozens of
        > > statements when signing legislation, he has asserted
        > > the right to
        > > ignore the parts of laws with which he disagrees.
        > > His administration
        > > has adopted policies regarding the treatment of
        > > prisoners of war that
        > > have disgraced the nation and alienated virtually
        > > the entire world.
        > > Usually, during wartime, the Supreme Court has
        > > refrained from passing
        > > judgment on presidential actions related to national
        > > defense. The
        > > court's unprecedented rebukes of Bush's policies on
        > > detainees indicate
        > > how far the administration has strayed from the rule
        > > of law.
        > >
        > > One other president bears comparison to Bush: James
        > > K. Polk. Some
        > > historians admire him, in part because he made their
        > > job easier by
        > > keeping a detailed diary during his administration,
        > > which spanned the
        > > years of the Mexican-American War. But Polk should
        > > be remembered
        > > primarily for launching that unprovoked attack on
        > > Mexico and seizing
        > > one-third of its territory for the United States.
        > >
        > > Lincoln, then a member of Congress from Illinois,
        > > condemned Polk for
        > > misleading Congress and the public about the cause
        > > of the war -- an
        > > alleged Mexican incursion into the United States.
        > > Accepting the
        > > president's right to attack another country
        > > "whenever he shall deem it
        > > necessary," Lincoln observed, would make it
        > > impossible to "fix any
        > > limit" to his power to make war. Today, one wishes
        > > that the country
        > > had heeded Lincoln's warning.
        > >
        > > Historians are loath to predict the future. It is
        > > impossible to say
        > > with certainty how Bush will be ranked in, say,
        > > 2050. But somehow, in
        > > his first six years in office he has managed to
        > > combine the lapses of
        > > leadership, misguided policies and abuse of power of
        > > his failed
        > > predecessors. I think there is no alternative but to
        > > rank him as the
        > > worst president in U.S. history.
        > >
        > > efoner@...
        > >
        > > Eric Foner is DeWitt Clinton professor
        > >
        > > of history at Columbia University.
        > >
        > >
        > >
        >
      • THOMAS JOHNSON
        I remember those discussions and was a little hesitant to rank him completely at the bottom, because (1 we lacked historical perspective and (2 he still had
        Message 3 of 9 , May 20, 2007
        • 0 Attachment
          I remember those discussions and was a little hesitant
          to rank him completely at the bottom, because (1 we
          lacked historical perspective and (2 he still had time
          to turn his presidency around a la Reagan in 86 and
          Clinton in 95. Historian Michael Beschloss spoke
          recently of the fact that we don't know how GWB will
          look in 30 years and beyond, but that it would be hard
          to imagine the events that would turn this presidency
          around. For me the telling point came last Dec when
          the Iraq Study Group offered him the political cover
          to save face and salvage some of his legacy. Instead,
          he rejected them and did the opposite of what they
          suggested and, sadly, it looks to me like we are
          living through the worst presidency in the history of
          the US. The amazing financial irresponsibility of the
          past 6 years has been obscured, and those chickens
          will be roosting with a vengeance.

          Tom


          --- Ram Lau <ramlau@...> wrote:

          > Back in 2004 I used to say that GWB would rank at
          > the bottom WITH his
          > great-great-great-grandfather Franklin Pierce
          > (D-NH), but after
          > Katrina I concluded that he beats Pierce and Harding
          > by at least a levee.
          >
          > Make no mistake that Harding was really bad. But he
          > only served two
          > years and then died gracefully, so it wasn't nearly
          > as catastrophic as
          > how we are having it.
          >
          >
          > --- In prezveepsenator@yahoogroups.com, THOMAS
          > JOHNSON <AVRCRDNG@...>
          > wrote:
          > >
          > > I've been interested about what historians are
          > saying
          > > about the current presidency, and here are some of
          > the
          > > thoughts I have gleaned. All are paraphrases but
          > > accurate to their intent.
          > > At the two Pulitzer prize-winning Arthur
          > Schlesinger
          > > Jr. memorial service last month, Schlesinger's
          > > daughter said the AS Jr. did not consider GW Bush
          > a
          > > worse president than James Buchanan but added " on
          > a
          > > good day, " inferring that some days he did.
          > > Pulitzer Prize candidate HW Brand wrote in the
          > March
          > > 2007 Texas Monthly that in the discussion on
          > whether
          > > Bush is worse than Buchanan, one would have to say
          > > that as bad a Buchanan was, his situation was
          > > inherited, where as Bush' troubles were
          > > self-inflicted. There are several contributors in
          > the
          > > article, including Robert Caro and Robert Dallek.
          > > 2004 Buchanan biographer Jean Baker began a talk
          > on
          > > Cspan in 2004 saying that 'James Buchanan is
          > widely
          > > considered the worst president in American
          > history..
          > > at least up until now.' It's my personal guess,
          > that
          > > her opinion has not improved since this was before
          > > Katrina, the war going so bad, the NSA spy
          > scandal,
          > > signing statements, etc.
          > > I'm not trying to be confrontational and would be
          > > interested in a sincere discussion on the matter.
          > >
          > > Tom
          > >
          > >
          > > --- Ram Lau <ramlau@...> wrote:
          > >
          > > >
          > >
          >
          http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/12/01/AR2006120101509.html
          > > > He's The Worst Ever
          > > >
          > > > By Eric Foner
          > > > Sunday, December 3, 2006; B01
          > > >
          > > > Ever since 1948, when Harvard professor Arthur
          > > > Schlesinger Sr. asked
          > > > 55 historians to rank U.S. presidents on a scale
          > > > from "great" to
          > > > "failure," such polls have been a favorite
          > pastime
          > > > for those of us who
          > > > study the American past.
          > > >
          > > > Changes in presidential rankings reflect shifts
          > in
          > > > how we view
          > > > history. When the first poll was taken, the
          > > > Reconstruction era that
          > > > followed the Civil War was regarded as a time of
          > > > corruption and
          > > > misgovernment caused by granting black men the
          > right
          > > > to vote. As a
          > > > result, President Andrew Johnson, a fervent
          > white
          > > > supremacist who
          > > > opposed efforts to extend basic rights to former
          > > > slaves, was rated
          > > > "near great." Today, by contrast, scholars
          > consider
          > > > Reconstruction a
          > > > flawed but noble attempt to build an interracial
          > > > democracy from the
          > > > ashes of slavery -- and Johnson a flat failure.
          > > >
          > > > More often, however, the rankings display a
          > > > remarkable year-to-year
          > > > uniformity. Abraham Lincoln, George Washington
          > and
          > > > Franklin D.
          > > > Roosevelt always figure in the "great" category.
          > > > Most presidents are
          > > > ranked "average" or, to put it less charitably,
          > > > mediocre. Johnson,
          > > > Franklin Pierce, James Buchanan, Warren G.
          > Harding,
          > > > Calvin Coolidge
          > > > and Richard M. Nixon occupy the bottom rung, and
          > now
          > > > President Bush is
          > > > a leading contender to join them. A look at
          > history,
          > > > as well as Bush's
          > > > policies, explains why.
          > > >
          > > > At a time of national crisis, Pierce and
          > Buchanan,
          > > > who served in the
          > > > eight years preceding the Civil War, and
          > Johnson,
          > > > who followed it,
          > > > were simply not up to the job. Stubborn,
          > > > narrow-minded, unwilling to
          > > > listen to criticism or to consider alternatives
          > to
          > > > disastrous
          > > > mistakes, they surrounded themselves with
          > sycophants
          > > > and shaped their
          > > > policies to appeal to retrogressive political
          > forces
          > > > (in that era,
          > > > pro-slavery and racist ideologues). Even after
          > being
          > > > repudiated in the
          > > > midterm elections of 1854, 1858 and 1866,
          > > > respectively, they ignored
          > > > major currents of public opinion and clung to
          > flawed
          > > > policies. Bush's
          > > > presidency certainly brings theirs to mind.
          > > >
          > > > Harding and Coolidge are best remembered for the
          > > > corruption of their
          > > > years in office (1921-23 and 1923-29,
          > respectively)
          > > > and for channeling
          > > > money and favors to big business. They slashed
          > > > income and corporate
          > > > taxes and supported employers' campaigns to
          > > > eliminate unions. Members
          > > > of their administrations received kickbacks and
          > > > bribes from lobbyists
          > > > and businessmen. "Never before, here or anywhere
          > > > else," declared the
          > > > Wall Street Journal, "has a government been so
          > > > completely fused with
          > > > business." The Journal could hardly have
          > anticipated
          > > > the even worse
          > > > cronyism, corruption and pro-business bias of
          > the
          > > > Bush administration.
          > > >
          > > > Despite some notable accomplishments in domestic
          > and
          > > > foreign policy,
          > > > Nixon is mostly associated today with disdain
          > for
          > > > the Constitution and
          > > > abuse of presidential power. Obsessed with
          > secrecy
          > > > and media leaks, he
          > > > viewed every critic as a threat to national
          > security
          > > > and illegally
          > > > spied on U.S. citizens. Nixon considered himself
          > > > above the law.
          > > >
          > > > Bush has taken this disdain for law even
          > further. He
          > > > has sought to
          > > > strip people accused of crimes of rights that
          > date
          > > > as far back as the
          > > > Magna Carta in Anglo-American jurisprudence:
          > trial
          > > > by impartial jury,
          > > > access to lawyers and knowledge of evidence
          > against
          > > > them. In dozens of
          > > > statements when signing legislation, he has
          > asserted
          > > > the right to
          > > > ignore the parts of laws with which he
          > disagrees.
          >
          === message truncated ===
        • Ram Lau
          ... You had an accompanying Congress that went along with it as far as financial irresponsibility goes. History will remember that Olympia Snowe (R-ME) and
          Message 4 of 9 , May 21, 2007
          • 0 Attachment
            > the US. The amazing financial irresponsibility of the
            > past 6 years has been obscured, and those chickens
            > will be roosting with a vengeance.

            You had an accompanying Congress that went along with it as far as
            financial irresponsibility goes. History will remember that Olympia
            Snowe (R-ME) and John McCain (R-AZ) and Jim Jeffords (I-VT) stood tall
            as the reckless tax cuts were passed.
          • THOMAS JOHNSON
            I d forgotten that those 3 showed the courage to do that. If Jeffords was an independant at that point, then that means that the Dems controlled the Senate and
            Message 5 of 9 , May 21, 2007
            • 0 Attachment
              I'd forgotten that those 3 showed the courage to do
              that. If Jeffords was an independant at that point,
              then that means that the Dems controlled the Senate
              and were enablers, which may be why they don't raise
              the issue much. I doubt that history will be kind to
              any of the recent Congresses.

              Tom


              --- Ram Lau <ramlau@...> wrote:

              > > the US. The amazing financial irresponsibility of
              > the
              > > past 6 years has been obscured, and those chickens
              > > will be roosting with a vengeance.
              >
              > You had an accompanying Congress that went along
              > with it as far as
              > financial irresponsibility goes. History will
              > remember that Olympia
              > Snowe (R-ME) and John McCain (R-AZ) and Jim Jeffords
              > (I-VT) stood tall
              > as the reckless tax cuts were passed.
              >
              >
              >
            • Ram Lau
              ... The compromised version of the 2001 tax cut: http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=107&session=1&vote=00170
              Message 6 of 9 , May 21, 2007
              • 0 Attachment
                > I'd forgotten that those 3 showed the courage to do
                > that. If Jeffords was an independant at that point,
                > then that means that the Dems controlled the Senate
                > and were enablers, which may be why they don't raise
                > the issue much. I doubt that history will be kind to
                > any of the recent Congresses.

                The compromised version of the 2001 tax cut:
                http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=107&session=1&vote=00170

                A good number of Democrats voted for it at the end, but for the 2003
                tax cut only Zell Miller (D-GA) and Ben Nelson (D-NE) sided with the
                Republicans while Jim Jeffords (I-VT), Lincoln Chafee (R-RI), John
                McCain (R-AZ) and Olympia Snowe (R-ME) voted Nay with the Democrats:
                http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=108&session=1&vote=00196

                Chafee just slipped my mind. The 2003 tax cut was passed 50-50 with
                Dick Cheney casting the tie-vote.
              • THOMAS JOHNSON
                Thanks, Ram.. I guess I need to amend my statement of the Dems being enablers.. I counted around 30 Dem votes against the tax cuts and it lists Jeffords as
                Message 7 of 9 , May 21, 2007
                • 0 Attachment
                  Thanks, Ram.. I guess I need to amend my statement of
                  the Dems being enablers.. I counted around 30 Dem
                  votes against the tax cuts and it lists Jeffords as
                  still a Republican, so the Republicans were the
                  majority party.

                  Tom


                  --- Ram Lau <ramlau@...> wrote:

                  > > I'd forgotten that those 3 showed the courage to
                  > do
                  > > that. If Jeffords was an independant at that
                  > point,
                  > > then that means that the Dems controlled the
                  > Senate
                  > > and were enablers, which may be why they don't
                  > raise
                  > > the issue much. I doubt that history will be kind
                  > to
                  > > any of the recent Congresses.
                  >
                  > The compromised version of the 2001 tax cut:
                  >
                  http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=107&session=1&vote=00170
                  >
                  > A good number of Democrats voted for it at the end,
                  > but for the 2003
                  > tax cut only Zell Miller (D-GA) and Ben Nelson
                  > (D-NE) sided with the
                  > Republicans while Jim Jeffords (I-VT), Lincoln
                  > Chafee (R-RI), John
                  > McCain (R-AZ) and Olympia Snowe (R-ME) voted Nay
                  > with the Democrats:
                  >
                  http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=108&session=1&vote=00196
                  >
                  > Chafee just slipped my mind. The 2003 tax cut was
                  > passed 50-50 with
                  > Dick Cheney casting the tie-vote.
                  >
                  >
                • Ram Lau
                  ... You can blame Ben Nelson (D-NE) for enabling the 2003 tax cut. Without his vote, the bill would have been defeated 51-49 and Cheney wouldn t have been able
                  Message 8 of 9 , May 22, 2007
                  • 0 Attachment
                    > Thanks, Ram.. I guess I need to amend my statement of
                    > the Dems being enablers.. I counted around 30 Dem
                    > votes against the tax cuts and it lists Jeffords as
                    > still a Republican, so the Republicans were the
                    > majority party.

                    You can blame Ben Nelson (D-NE) for enabling the 2003 tax cut. Without
                    his vote, the bill would have been defeated 51-49 and Cheney wouldn't
                    have been able to decide its passage.

                    Ram
                  Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.