Home
Archive
Columnists
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
100 words for 100 days: submit your 100 word essay and get published on AlterNet
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Advertisement
Advertisement

New FEC Maneuvers: Von Spakovsky To Get Separate Vote

Posted by Christy Hardin Smith, Firedoglake at 10:44 AM on May 7, 2008.


In a bid to break a stalemate in the FEC appointment process, the Bush Administration will allow Hans von Spakovsky a separate vote.
voterfraud
voter fraud

Share and save this post:
Digg iconDelicious iconReddit iconFark iconYahoo! iconNewsvine! iconFacebook iconNewsTrust icon

Got a tip for a post?:
Email us | Anonymous form

Get PEEK in your
mailbox!

 

In a bid to end the stalemate caused by his own stubborn intransigence, President Bush re-worked his FEC nominations and has apparently cut a new deal with Senate leadership that would allow for a separate vote on the divisive Hans Von Spakovsky nomination. This follows the prior reach out that Sen. Harry Reid did at the end of April to try and move things along to fill the multiple FEC vacancies in a presidential election year.

For those who need background on just why Mr. Von Spakovsky is so reviled among decent people who value a fair election, see here, here, here, here, here, here here, here, here and here for starters. Just a peek into the GOP's odious voter suppression void.

Up until now, the Bush Administration -- and their personal administration toady, Mitch McConnell, who has ties to Von Spakovsky himself -- have vehemently prevented a separate vote on the controversial Mr. Von Spakovsky. But no longer.

Which makes me wonder a number of things. What does this mean for the federal election law-breaking McCain? Especially if Von Spakovsky doesn't get through the process -- which is much more likely on a separate vote? What does this mean in terms of a head count -- Mitch McConnell is highly competitive and hates to lose at anything, so what is he promising to gain the votes he needs to foist a voter suppression tactic guru onto the FEC? And what, if anything, is the Democratic leadership doing to counter this?

Or, in the alternative, is Von Spakovsky still on the list as a sop to the wingnuttiest, knowing that his nomination will likely go down in a vote -- but allowing the Bush Administration to save face by saying that they tried? And, if so, what has Von Spakovsky been promised as a pay off at the end of this for going through the public humiliation motions and taking one for the team? Is Scooter about to get a new pal at the Hudson Institute or some other wingnut welfare shop? Inquiring minds and all that...

In the meantime, since we're all more than aware of the shortcomings of various members of the Senate Rules Committee -- which theoretically has jurisdiction over approval of the nominations and proceeds on them at this point, unless the deal is meant to bypass rules and go straight to the Senate floor for a vote (still working on details on this) -- how about we make a few calls today? Every Senator could use a call.

And while you are on the phone asking Senators to say NO to Von Spakovsky, please also ask them to say NO to any compromise on telecom immunity or any weakening of American civil liberties under the Bill of Rights. Just say no to a FISA deal. For that matter, so could House members on the FISA issue. I'm hearing that the vote on a FISA deal may come next week -- and that Steny's had his staff working overtime to make it happen. Yes, Steny, we're still watching...

AlterNet is a non profit organization and does not make political endorsements. The opinions expressed by our writers are their own.

Digg!

Tagged as: fec, judges, von spakovsky


Cheney Looks Awkward as Pelosi Interrupts Him to Applaud Obama's Victory
Vice President Cheney stood before Congress and read the official results of the 2008 presidential election. It's now officially official.
Post by Amanda Terkel. January 8, 2009.
Obama Can Learn from Bush: 'We Tried' Ain't Enough
We will need to remind Obama again and again that for those voters concerned about immigration, 'almost' just ain't gonna cut it come 2012.
Post by Paco Fabian. January 8, 2009.
Rachel Maddow on 'Daily Show': 'Insulted,' 'Embarrassed' By Bush
Jon Stewart and Maddow talk Bush, Obama, Bill Clinton, MSNBC, and the Munsters.
Post by Danny Shea. January 8, 2009.
Advertisement
Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
Not only this, but...
Posted by: Quannah on May 8, 2008 10:46 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
as Keith Olbermann reported last night on Countdown, Bush has decided NOT to re-nominate the chairman of the FEC, David Mason (a Democrat) for another term.

And it isn't a coincidence that Mason isn't being re-nominated. He is asking questions surrounding the loan McStain got by leveraging the money he was supposed to receive from his pledge to take federal money for his campaign - the pledge he is now backing out of. Chairman Mason believes this is clearly a violation of campaign finance laws. And he's right. But that investigation will not happen now. Mason will be gone soon, and so will that pesky inquiry. What a windfall for McStain! He gets to keep the borrowed money he swindled the bank for, and the "problem" of Mason will soon disappear!

So, magically, Chairman Mason isn't being re-nominated to the FEC. The one person to question the legality of McStain's bait-and-switch con job to get cash to finance his campaign.

These crooks are going to find whatever way they can to steal yet another election - by hook or by crook. This is yet another cog in that wheel.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]