As though the only alternative is to take Bush's offer or forget it? Typical lilly-livered Democrats in Washington if you ask me.

First, all confirmations for everything should be halted until the Dictator agrees to withdraw our troops from Iraq beginning as soon as possible and concluding no later than December 2008.

Second, any BS nominee Bush puts up who clearly is nothing but a malevolent hack should be rejected out of hand. No discussion, no reconsideration. If he wants to nominate people then he needs to nominate people who are not clearly opposed to the policies they are to enforce and who do not have a history of partisan dirty tricks as does Baron Von Spakovsky.

Democrats can play the obstruction game too, but it would require a littel backbone and some cajones and I don't see much of that from the crowd of August leaders we have elected to the US Congress supposedly as Democrats.

Democrats, if you are reading this, stick to your guns. No FEC is far better than one that has no integrity.

Gee, what a dilemma. Quake in your boots over what might happen...or do the right thing.

I guess Bush doesn't really want his Attorney General confirmed then.

No more recesses. Stay in session and while in session, draw up articles of impeachment and stop the madness. Simple enough. Some say there aren't enough votes to convict on impeachment - that can't be known until the trial in the Senate commences and after the evidence is heard, and after all the criminality of this adminstration is laid out for the public to see, there may not be a Pub left who won't vote for impeachment. Confront this President now or the next one will be much worse, no matter who it is.

ARG & Augustine - impeachment would do NOTHING. Impeachment without conviction is meaningless, and conviction requires two thirds of the Senate. If you think that 17 Republicans will vote to make Nancy Pelosi the President of the United States, you are completely barking *insane*.

LawyerSmith - it doesn't matter how much evidence there is, or how criminal the actions - the Republican party overwhelmingly SUPPORTS these criminal actions, after all.

Not allowing any recesses, though - that's a good idea, and a workable one.

With Democrats out-raising the Republicans in every venue (Presidential race, Senate, and the House) by significant margins this cycle, how is an ineffectual FEC a problem for the Dems? Seems like it would be an advantage.

What!Me Worry? Both parties have worked for the last half century to reduce the voting population, with great success. So what if the chinless wonder works at the FCC. The RNC has great plans for disenfranchising voters in 2008; this just makes it slightly easier & the Dems can cry crocodile tears all the while.

I'm certainly not an expert on the FEC, but as an outside observer of past elections, I frankly don't see how having the FEC "crippled" during next year would be a problem.

Maybe they do a lot that we don't hear about, but I've never SEEN an instance where the FEC responded immediately, anyway. They take the complaint and maybe start an investigation, and sometime the following year you might hear about a fine or whatnot.

They don't need a fully staffed board to accept complaints.

If it's leave it unstaffed for a cycle or allow someone who fundamentally doesn't believe in the right to vote to be a member, that's not even a difficult choice: leave it unstaffed for a cycle.

Cripple the FEC. No more king nominees for anything. Shut down the whole thing for all we care. What we want Nazis controlling our elections? We are better with no FEC. Let's contact the UN and get some gd observers to monitor the next election. We are like a banana republic, so we should have International monitors.

Tactical battles like this always mask the true, main issue: The FEC, as currently constructed and controlled by the two main (and, corrupt) old party's, is broke- by design.

Election integrity is not about parties (at least, it's not supposed to be, in this country). It's about the integrity and legitimacy of the governance process. There are non-partisan government organizations - eg. GAO; CRS; Office of Technology Assessment (which needs to be brought back) before that. It's not impossible.
The governing law for the FEC needs to be changed so that no one may be put on it who has been active in partisan politics for the last five years. In short, a non-partisan FEC. Without that, even if it were truly given the enforcement powers it needs, they would never be used; since both big party's are guilty of gross violations of electoral and governance integrity laws on a regular basis.

May be im a mourner may be i deserve to do something else.
Need to feel the sense.

On what basis can the republicans hold hostage the other three nominees? If Von Spakovsky is a Republican, that means at least 1 of the other nominees is a Democrat -- how can the Republicans hold that person's nomination hostage? I thought the Senate was controlled by the Democrats.

I don't see how Bush packing the FEC with recess appts would be worse than Von Spakovsky -- I agree with the other commentators here -- demand reasonable Republican nominees, and stay in session to prevent recess appts. Surely the danger of the FEC throwing the 2008 election should focus the Democrats' minds wonderfully on this.

Without going into whether impechment is a good thing or a bad thing, I think we all know these Dems won't do it. If the Dems had pressed for documents, enforced their subpeonas, and blockjed a few key funding votes then I think they'd have more leverage than they have now. They haven't, so I don't think there will be enough time for impeachment before the elections.

That said, the Dems should STILL pursue those lines that could lead to impeachment, for one solid reason: it will damage the Repubs even more by Nov 2008, and it will give them more leverage to get things they want done.

Repubs should be MADE to filibuster on record and in person. Repubs should be made to answer for supporting filibusters of legislation wanted by 70% of the people. Repubs who flaunt subpeons should be held accounatble to the Congress to set an negative example for future presidents of any stripe.

If not, then there is but one lesson a future president can take away: If you just say no, Congress will wring their hands, send sternly worded letters, and end with a very concerned "well, I never!" as they walk away to compose another sternly worded letter.

Fred Wertheimer, whom you kindly cited, also wrote an elaborate critique at Democracy21's website explaining the defective construction of FEC. Given the under-funding condition of the new HAVA's EAC, I wonder if FredW sees some alternative way out of the elections oversight standoff; HAVA was progress, but VRA is being bent in state courts in ways to suppress voters. Which is to say, oversight will be important in 2008, or we will be back at Scotus with the Brooks Brothers rebellion members crowing once again that the vote counting in FL should stop and the Republican candidate deserves appointment by Scotus again, as in 2000.

Actually, I see a connectivity between a potential Mukasey nomination completion and the FEC standoff; if congress can devise a way to improve both FEC and EAC, some of the depoliticization of DoJ which would be part of Mukasey's early chores, could be done in concert with congress.

This is no-brainer political winner for the democrats. Make the Republican defend Mr. Von Voter-Supression.

Call Bush a hack and a liar and go to war with him over the charge that he's trying to rig the election because he knows he can't win it with impartial oversight.

If Bush and the Republicans tank the FEC board, then campaign on the fact that they will not operate in good faith as a minority and they don't care about honest elections.

Is any independant or Democratic voter going to doubt this? The Republicans have no leg to back up their threats. If they tank the FEC it's one more reason you need to elect a party that believes government should at least try to function.

The Republicans want to run as being against fair elections? Let em.

After 2000 and 2004...does it matter?
If ya all don't get it by now?
The only thing I trust in America today are the Colorado Rockies...

Well there you go.....maybe someone can get this over to the Dems who voted this goof ball out of committe in the first place. Now we have another fine mess youve gotten us into. YO FEINSTEIN SIT DOWN PAY ATTENTION TO THIS>>>YOU CANNOT NOT TRUST THESE REPUBLICANS WITH ANYTHING. They are like the Devil always conspiring to do evil!

If the Dems go ahead and confirm this guy, it will be a slap in the face to all those who were disenfranchised, as well as all of us who attempted to expose this despicable practice. I am appalled that this guy is even up for the nomination.

I still don't understand why caging and targeting Af Am voters doesn't result in jail time. Only in bush's America is one rewarded with a prominent appointment for such abhorrent actions. Our country is in a sad state.

Just remember who it was that got us into this pickle... Senator DINO DiFi of California and one of the Senators from Nebraska.

It is time to give the Republican senators offices in the basement, no phones, use of committee rooms.... like they treated the Dems for 10 years... And they can come down to the floor of the senate to have their filibuster.... No more holds... It worked once, but not anymore.

Another solution, from the gooper playbook. Get a sympathetic prosecuter to open a formal investigation of his misdeeds. That should make him disappear.

This is a set-up to explain to the simpleminded base why the gallant defenders of liberty, the Democrats, had no choice but to confirm a demonstrated perpetrator of election fraud to the FEC. Bravely, the strong and fierce Democrats did everything they could, but they were outwitted, again, by those all-powerful, clever Republicans.

The fight was valiant, but the Democrats lost regardless.

It's enough to make me puke. They've played this act so many times it's hard to believe they expect anyone to believe it anymore. They have alternatives, to claim otherwise is just another lie. The Democrats have no more integrity than their so-called opponents, the whole system is rigged.

It would be far more respectful to those of us they screw if they didn't pretend the outcome is in doubt. These charades are as insulting to the audience as they should be embarrassing to the performers. Shame on all of them.

Go to the senate web site and copy your post to Reid.

What I wrote to Harry Reid:

If the Roll Call report is correct, and you made a deal to confirm Hans von Spakovsky to the FEC, then you should resign your position.

After Iraq, FISA, and other things, I'm seeing the Democrats as nothing but Bush enablers and towel-givers.

Do you think we're all idiots out here?

Such betrayal. Shame!

There really is a bottom line on this guy. He simply can't be let on FEC. I know its tough, but it just cannot be allowed.

WAIT.....We dont have the power to impeach however if we wait until after the next election we can have some investigations and indictments as well as trials ...assuming we get a democrat president ther WILL BE NO PARDONS like Bush did in the Valerie Plame case..This way we could put a whole bunch of these assholes in jail?

No recess this year or next. Sorry. the bastards have to be stopped and if the dems use their heads, every senator can get a partial recess.
No recess!!!!!!!!!!

Go ahead and play chicken. There's not enough lipstick in the world to make this pig look good. Pound on it at every opportunity and use "the culture of corruption" accusation on him. He's a poster boy for "the culture of corruption", after all.

As far as I'm concerned, if we have one less federal agency controled by the Bush Crime Family, that CEASES TO EXIST, America wins. Shut them all down.

But seriously, Congress ultimately has the upper hand, as it does in all of these matters - funding. They just have to use it.

Question to TPMm: Why is there a picture of Mitch McConnell accompanying this story? He's not even mentioned in it.

Hans von Spakovsky should not even be allowed to enter the DOJ building.

eric wrote on October 5, 2007 6:10 PM:
"enough with the impeachment! Who gets impeached? Clinton AND Gore? and then what? You think Bush and McCain want to see the speaker of the house become President? Or do you think a Gore presidency is better? Or, do you just go after Gore? What value does that serve? What you do is learn how to act as a partisan with pointed and value laden rhetoric to paint the other PARTY as inept and incapable of governing fairly and with a sense of common purpose."

Funny. That sounds so familiar. Been so long now - what, 9, almost 10 years. And look how much the impeaching party suffered for the stupidity of impeaching even though they didn't have the votes to convict. All it got them was a Double-High Authoritarian Dictator in the White House who has spent the last six years dismantling every thing his predecessor did and turning America into a dream-come-true for his most fanatic supporters.

Hmm. That doesn't sound too bad an outcome for an impeachment effort that never had a chance.