"Old Bull" Democrats Frustrate House GOP

By David S. Broder
Monday, October 6, 2003; Page A01

For more than two decades, as his state has become increasingly Republican, Rep. John M. Spratt Jr. of South Carolina has moved steadily up the seniority ladder to become the Budget Committee's senior Democrat and the second-ranking member on Armed Services.

Like most others in his party, Spratt voices "great frustration" that the tightly disciplined GOP majority regularly curtails floor debate and blocks Democratic amendments from even being considered. But, like almost all the senior House Democrats, he also finds motivation to stay around, election after election. He finds value and fulfillment in briefing colleagues, reporters and editorial boards on what he sees as an increasingly threatening fiscal situation.

If Spratt is frustrated by the House Republicans, they are equally frustrated by him. He plans to run for a 12th term in a district carried handily by President Bush -- a seat he virtually owns but one the GOP feels confident will fall to them whenever Spratt retires.

The abundance of John Spratts -- veteran Democrats in their sixties or beyond who hang in year after year, even when the odds are heavy against a switch of control that would make them committee chairmen instead of ranking minority members -- is a main reason that Republican majorities in the House remain at historically narrow levels. A senior Republican strategist lists 21 districts held by "old bull" Democrats who are the ranking minority members of full committees or subcommittees that, he said, would certainly be competitive and very possibly switch if the incumbent were to step down.

more…
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A48996-2003Oct5.html

And here's to them staying the hell away from small aircraft.

At least they got some balls. They're the ones who should be in the Democratic leadership since they actually have the balls to speak up.

I'm not sure if you've heard the debate over using the term balls but I do think it is valid. Maybe we should stop using it as it seems to bring up the fact you need balls (ie. testicles) to be brave. Yet women by nature can be brave without balls.

So it's a pretty sexist comment to use the term "balls" as saying someone is brave and strong. I'm sure you didn't think anything of it, but it's good food for thought.

I had posted in a site that has a majority of freepers and he had a really nasty response about an article I posted and accused me of having no balls.lol I wrote back to him and then blocked him.

She's not an old bull or an old cow either (lol). She's a middle aged lady (sorta like me) who could mow down Schwarzenneger with her passionate truth-telling.

Ellen Tauscher is my Congresswoman. She's got balls. Maybe they are technically ovaries, but she's got brass ones and you had better not cross her or she will put the hurt on you so bad you'll wish your grandparents had never been born.

and I love it when she kicks Repug. butt!

Julie

Balls have more to do with testosterone and other hormones that affect behaviour. i.e it's a drug induced reaction of the body under the influence of drugs (it's own).

Courage is doing what you know is right even if there is great danger. The less testosterone involved - the more actually courageous the act.

when those two open up on their opponents, they hide like snakes.

Begging the question, how can anything about the budget zzzzzzz be dynamite?

Its a numbers game, so knowing the numbers and how they work puts you way ahead. At Spratt's level, he's like a whiz card-counter with budget numbers, knows how input outputs, and frequently cuts the pants off repub bleeding wallet smoke and mirrors. At the casino, they would simply ban him to keep from losing, but on House committees its not so easy. Unless they go back to calling the cops.

Remember, the budget is the money, inflows and outflows, what its all about. Spratt does great work. I optimistically see him as Chairman next Congress. :)

Nobody--absolutely nobody--understands budget issues better than he does. And nobody in America can explain them as articulately. I look for him to be Sec Com under Dean/Clark.

It drives them crazy when any white man is a Democrat, especially when he gets elected. These Republicans know that if the white folks don't stick together their goose is cooked.

with umbrellas.

when the Repukes kept propping him up so he could vote - never heard the papers calls Repukes names for that - for pete's sake the man was living in Walter Reed

Gephardt has been pitching these bulls for eight years now to just "hold on for one more term" because we can't win back the House without holding those seats.

The problem is that for four cycles now we've had noticibly few retirements in the house than the Republicans have. And since open seats are the ones most likely to switch parties we have to take things back quickly. As soon as a few of these guys decide it isn't worth holding on any more (or frankly, just want to go home to their family - which they have earned), we're going to have a landslide of retirements. We could lose better than a dozen seats plus the four or five we could lose in TX. It could look like a significant shift natonally to the right without any demographic change at all.

If we can win things back, however, we can make it attractive enough to stay that we can stagger retirements over the next couple cycles.