Principles and Commitments

Yesterday an anonymous commenter drew attention to the text of the "Gang of 14" agreement to argue that Sen. Collins had committed to the "extraordinary circumstances" standard for judicial nominee filibusters only for a set period of time.

Indeed, the text of the agreement specifies that its provisions are "related to...judicial nominations in the 109th Congress." So it's certainly fair to say that Collins, by backing filibusters in less than extraordinary circumstances several years later, hasn't violated the letter of the agreement.

On the other hand, I don't remember anyone stressing the time-limited nature of the Gang of 14 compromise when it was put into effect. In fact, I'd go so far as to say that there was a widely shared sense that the "extraordinary circumstances" standard in particular was being put forward as a "new normal"--one the Gang of 14 members didn't just settle for but actually believed in.

And the contemporaneous news accounts that show up near the top of a Google search do nothing to undercut that impression.

But of course, the best way to evaluate Collins' integrity on the issue is to look at her own statements. Here's her press release on the agreement:

This agreement is based on trust. And most important, it helps preserve the unique culture of this institution. It is a culture that is built upon a foundation of collegiality and cooperation that transcends partisanship. It is a culture in which legislative goals are reached with patience and perseverance, and through the art of negotiation and compromise. This agreement preserves that Senate culture and shows a respect for the important principles that make the Senate such a great institution.

And here she is in 2010, several years after the end of the 109th Congress:

In 2005, a group of senators came together to negotiate an agreement for considering judicial nominees. This "Gang of 14," of which I was part, sought to avoid what was known as the "nuclear option," a change in the Senate rules that would have brought about a legislative meltdown.

[...]

While leaders on both sides hardened their positions, the 14 of us--seven from each party--joined to forge a solution. We established a new standard, stating that we would support filibusters of judicial nominees only in "extraordinary circumstances."

[...]

Our deal restored trust and helped preserve the unique culture of the Senate.

If in 2010 Collins thought that her commitment to the culture-preserving, principle-respecting "extraordinary circumstances" standard had long lapsed...she sure had a funny way of expressing it.

Promise Breaking

Can anyone sincerely believe that Collins' bizarre interest in pruning the judiciary meets the "extraordinary circumstances" threshold that she committed to back in 2005?

Sens. Olympia Snowe and Susan Collins of Maine joined all but one other Republican today in blocking the nomination of Caitlin Halligan for the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit.

[...]

Collins told reporters on Capitol Hill that she voted against the former New York state solicitor general because the seat has been vacant for six years and is no longer needed because the D.C. Circuit’s case load is on the wane.

[...]

Democratic Sen. Dianne Feinstein of California was among those pointing out that there are three vacancies currently on the D.C. Circuit, so two seats would remain vacant if Halligan is confirmed.

[...]

Snowe and Collins are part of a group of senators who have promised not to use the filibuster to block judicial nominees from receiving final Senate votes except under extraordinary circumstances.

As with Collins' decision to block the nomination of Goodwin Liu and her vote against the confirmation of trailblazer Alison Nathan, what's involved here--other than hypocrisy--is naked partisan politics.

Stonewall

PPH:

President Obama hopes to persuade Maine's two senators and several other Republican lawmakers to break party ranks and help confirm his nominee to head the new Consumer Financial Protection Bureau.

A Senate vote is expected this week, but so far Sens. Olympia Snowe and Susan Collins are apparently not budging.

Both have said they are concerned about oversight of the bureau.

[...]

Former Ohio Attorney General Richard Cordray is Obama's nominee to head the bureau.

[...]

Collins has met with Cordray and found him to be "an intelligent, qualified individual," said Kevin Kelley, Collins' spokesman.

Remember in 2008 when Collins ran on a platform of blocking qualified nominees to extract political concessions? Me neither.

But then maybe there's another explanation for what's going on here?

Collins is disappointed "the White House is choosing to make this a partisan issue," Kelley said.

Got that? The Obama administration has the temerity to try to stand up a regulatory agency mandated by law--a law Collins voted for--and they're the ones engaged in partisan politics.

Standing Corrected

Sen. Collins surprises your humble narrator and does the right thing, coming out in favor of the payroll tax cut being offered up by Senate Democrats:

Collins said in a phone interview tonight that her goal is to make sure "working families aren't faced with a tax increase come January, frankly at a very bad time given the fragility of our economy."

And while Collins doesn't want to see small business owners hit with a surcharge on the income tax paid by people making more than $1 million, she said the Senate Democrats' proposal does help offset the impact of the surcharge by also applying the payroll tax cut to the first $5 million of an employer's payroll as well as to employees' wages.

Since the bill doesn't have enough support to make it to the floor, the vote is more or less symbolic.

But it's an important symbol.

And when a pol as typically obsequious to corporate interests as Susan Collins feels compelled to align herself with working people at the expense of the wealthiest among us, you know the political winds have shifted.

Quote of the Day

Sen. Collins:

"What we've been hearing over and over again is that the reason Republicans are opposed to the surtax [on the rich] is because of the concern on its impact on job creation," she said. "Well if you carve out employers you take away that argument."

Carve Out

Press Herald:

A number of Republicans say they are agreeable to extending the payroll tax cut, but don't want its cost -- about $250 billion -- added to the deficit. They also say that the surcharge on millionaires will hurt small businesses and hinder job creation. Other Republicans are ambivalent about the tax cut, saying they aren't sure it will do much in the long run to strengthen the economy.

Collins told reporters on Capitol Hill Tuesday that she might be willing to compromise on the issue if Senate Democrats agreed to exempt small business income from the surcharge on the income taxes paid by millionaires.

"I have advocated that we do a carve out for small business out of the so-called millionaires tax to make sure that it is not hitting subchapter S corporations, for example, and discouraging small employers from doing more hiring," Collins said.

Set aside the question of whether folks making more than $1 million per year in personal income should be seen as engaging in "small business."

Here we have Sen. Collins saying that she's got no problem raising taxes on millionaires and billionaires--she just want to tweak the plan currently on the table.

Has a bit of a familiar ring to it, no?

Any chance Collins is looking to associate herself with a popular proposal while giving herself an out--in the form of an unworkable amendment with no constituency--so that she can avoid actually having to vote for it?

No, of course not.

Deference

Unless you're a hard right Republican, isn't the whole point of electing someone like Sen. Collins that she doesn't defer to a fringe radical like Sen. James Inhofe (R-OK)?

Neither Maine Republican is a supporter of Lautenberg’s Safe Chemicals Act...Collins...hopes negotiations going on over Lautenberg’s bill will lead to an agreement large numbers of senators can support.

[...]

Collins...noted that there are behind-the-scenes, talks reportedly going on between environmental and industry groups and staffers from the offices of Lautenberg and GOP Sen. James Inhofe of Oklahoma, the top Republican on the environment committee.

Revolving Door Watch

And so it goes:

Blank Rome has been hired by Tiburon Associates Inc., an Alexandria, Va.-based government contractor, to lobby for "congressional assistance regarding compliance with federal acquisition rules governing small-business set-asides," according to lobbying disclosure records. C.J. Zane, ex-chief of staff to Rep. Don Young (R-Alaska), and Katherine Scontras, once a legislative correspondent to Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine), are lobbying for the contractor.

Collins: Palestinian PM Concedes UN Error

Sen. Collins:

[Salam Fayyad, the Prime Minister of the Palestinian Authority and I] discussed the PA's unilateral appeal to the UN to grant recognition to a Palestinian State, a move that I strongly oppose. He seemed to concede that this approach was a mistake.

Quote of the Day

Via Andrew Sullivan, here's former Sen. Rick Santorum:

"We'll repeal Obamacare and get rid any idea that you have to have abortion coverage or contraceptive coverage. One of the things that I will talk about that no president has talked about before is I think the dangers of contraception in this country, the sexual liberty idea and many in the Christian faith have said, you know contraception is okay. It's not okay because it's a license to do things in a sexual realm that is counter to how things are supposed to be."

Sen. Collins worked to re-elect Santorum in 2006. (And no, this isn't much more outrageous than the kinds of things he was saying at the time.)

Define "Open-Ended"

Sen. Collins:

"I have never supported an open-ended and unconditional commitment of U.S. troops in Iraq. However, I do remain concerned that many U.S. military officials have repeatedly said that they believe a residual force of U.S. troops might have to remain in order to continue training Iraqi troops to help ensure that the significant gains we have made there, at great cost to American blood and treasure, are not lost."

Flashback to May, 2007:

CNN reports that Sen. Collins "will consider calling for troops to be withdrawn from Iraq if sufficient progress has not been made in the country by September."

Ayotte Amendment

Via e-mail, ACLU of Maine Executive Director Shenna Bellows says that her organization is "very concerned" about Sen. Collins' vote in favor of the Ayotte amendment, which would have banned the use of civilian courts for many terrorism cases.

Some more background from an ACLU prepared statement:

The failure of the Ayotte amendment...should be a wake-up call to anyone who still thinks there is a binding deal for the National Defense Authorization Act detention provisions. Top leaders of the Senate Armed Services Committee have repeatedly said they struck a deal on detention issues when the Committee passed its bill behind closed doors earlier this year. But now it turns out that literally all six Republicans on the Armed Services Committee who supported the NDAA detention deal by voting against a nearly identical Ayotte amendment in committee markup (McCain, Graham, Wicker, Chambliss, Scott Brown, and Collins) flipped sides this morning and voted for the Ayotte amendment.

“It should be clear now that the bipartisan NDAA detention 'deal' is a farce.

Sen. Snowe also supported the amendment.

Quote of the Day

Lawrence Lessig:

Forget the 99 percent. We are the 99.95 percent of people who have never maxed out in a Congressional election campaign by giving the maximum amount. It is .05 percent of America who have given $2500 in the last election to a Congressional candidate, .05 percent, and Congress listens to them.

Drum Roll Please

We're excited to announce the 2012 Margaret Chase Smith Journalism Award competition.

The $100 award, named after an American who spoke uncomfortable truths to powerful people, will go to a Maine journalist with the fortitude to press elected officials to answer difficult, important questions.

For the 2012 round, the award will be given to the first Maine-based reporter who asks Sen. Snowe or Sen. Collins how she would balance the federal budget and then provides readers/viewers/listeners with the context necessary to assess the plausibility of the answer and see how it squares with the pol's legislative record.

Fine print:

--No, this is not a joke.

--Want to make a commitment of $5 toward the $100 prize to help defray our costs? E-mail us at the address at right.

--The contest period begins today. The deadline for eligible reporting is October 13, 2012.

--Maine-based print, radio and TV journalists are eligible for the prize. Reports must run on Maine TV, radio or in the print edition of Maine newspaper to be eligible. (Sorry, no blog posts.)

--Judgments as to eligibility will be made by Collins Watch at our sole discretion.

--Judgements as to whether a particular piece of reporting meets the award criteria will be made by Collins Watch at our sole discretion.

--No application necessary. $100 prize will be sent automatically to the author of the first piece of reporting that meets the award criteria.

--Collins Watch reserves the right to grant no award if no Maine-based reporting is found to qualify during the award period.

--Collins Watch reserves the right to amend the rules governing the award at any time, as necessary.

No On Nathan

In spite of no votes from Sen. Collins and Sen. Snowe, the nomination of Alison Nathan to US District Court was approved today by the US Senate. She will become only the second "out" lesbian to serve in the federal judiciary.

It's not clear why Collins opposed the nomination--there's no explanatory press release on her website as of this writing.

But given her support for truly fringe Bush administration nominees like Priscilla Owen and Janice Rogers Brown, you'd think she might want to explain her decision to vote against a trailblazer like Nathan, about whom Betsy Smith, executive director of Equality Maine said, via e-mail, "[her] qualifications are superb and [her] presence reflects the diversity of our country."

Collins Filibusters Jobs Bill

Sen. Collins, who played a pivotal role in shaping the largest Keynesian stimulus in US history just three years ago, has voted to block even a debate on the administration's jobs bill:

Collins said, the administration's "take it or leave it" proposition in an effort to score political points persuaded her to vote against the bill. She added that the administration also changed the bill to retain "sweetheart tax breaks for the five biggest oil and gas companies."

Got that? Unemployment is at 9%. Incomes are falling. The middle class is struggling mightily.

But since the administration went ahead and offered a "take it or leave it" proposal (which was somehow substantially rewritten just days ago) everyone should suffer.

And besides, the bill didn't get rid of tax breaks which have nothing to do with its goal. Ergo, the whole thing is a bad idea.

To call this incoherence is to be way too generous.

Which is why Collins ought to be pressed to explain herself more clearly, and to offer something closer to an honest explanation for her vote.

If only there was a group of people--a corps you could say--whose job it was to report back to their fellow citizens about what accountable representatives are up to and why...

Collins Defends Scott Brown

After Senate candidate Elizabeth Warren noted--in response to a debate question referencing Sen. Scott Brown's (R-MA) nude Cosmopolitan centerfold--that she had "kept [her] clothes on" while paying for law school, Brown had a sharp, tart response: "Thank God."

Too bad it was classless, ugly and kind of icky.

But that hasn't stopped Sen. Collins from coming to the aid of the Brown campaign's furious spin operation:

Collins similarly turned the spotlight on Warren, saying Brown was "merely responding" to comments first made by the Harvard professor, in which she "made light of the difficult choices in his life"--a reference to Warren's recent jab at Brown's decision to pose nude for a magazine in his 20’s.

Set aside Collins' one-sided take on what transpired. Set aside her decision to use "difficult choices" as a euphemism for Brown's decision to pose nude.

Remember, Collins is a civility scold. She's literally made a career out of the proposition that our country would be stronger if politicians treated each other more politely.

And yet Scott Brown comes along and says "thank God" Elizabeth Warren didn't take her clothes off. And we all know exactly what he means. And Collins doesn't just give Brown a pass. She defends him.

It's enough to make you wonder.

The "Small Business" Canard

There's been a noticeable improvement in the quality and diversity of political writing on BDN Op-Ed page in recent months. This piece from Nate Libby, director of the Maine Small Business Coalition, exemplifies the trend:

Small-business owners know what's happening in our communities because we serve and employ the workers who make our local economies thrive.

[...]

Too often, we hear arguments for "business-friendly" policies that don’t match up with our experience--mostly coming from big-business lobbyists who claim to speak for our interests. The latest example is the “business” support for Sen. Susan Collins' "regulatory time out" and "regulatory accountability" proposals.

[...]

Take the "time out" proposal, which puts a freeze on new health and workplace safety rules or standards. When a football team calls a time-out, play stops on the field. But that's not what Sen. Collins is proposing at all. She is proposing to let big polluters, big banks and big insurers keep playing their games, but to take the officials out of the game so they can't throw flags on penalties.

Who wins in that situation? The big guys do. And who loses? The little guys.

It's striking to see a Maine small business owner--let alone the leader of a 2,500 business coalition--calling out Collins' bogus "small business" posturing. But Libby's basic point in the piece isn't controversial--at least not in the small business community.

The fact is, very few business owners spend their days obsessing about government regulations.

Collins "Unfamiliar" With DOMA Impact

Sen. Collins, who has won plaudits and awards from several gay rights groups in recent months--and is slated to be honored by another prominent group next week--professes not to know how the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) is affecting gay couples:

When Metro Weekly spoke with Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine) about her views on the repeal of DOMA, the senator celebrated by many LGBT advocates for her prominent role in ending "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" said she was unfamiliar with the federal impact of DOMA on same-sex couples and with the law aimed at repealing DOMA...

Speaking with Metro Weekly at [the Sept. 20 Log Cabin Republican's dinner honoring her], Collins had no view on the bill and claimed to be unaware of the impact of Section 3 of DOMA--which defines "marriage" and "spouse" in federal law as referring only to marriages between one man and one woman.

Asked about and given a brief description of the [Respect for Marriage Act, which would repeal DOMA], Collins said, "I was going to say, I'm not sure what the Respect for Marriage Act is." She then added that she would "have to look at that."

Collins then said that she hadn't "looked at" the federal limits on marriage recognition put in place by DOMA, stating that she was not aware of how Section 3 of DOMA impacts same-sex couples.

Collins's comments are particularly confusing given that she was the sole Republican Senate co-sponsor of the Domestic Partnership Benefits and Obligations Act in the 111th Congress, a bill to extend health insurance benefits to federal employees in same-sex relationships--legislation made necessary by Section 3 of DOMA.

Asked on Sept. 28 for follow-up information about Collins's position on DOMA and the RMA, Collins's office was unable to provide immediate comment and a spokesman did not respond to an email seeking comment.

They Write Op-Eds

Jonathan Shenkin, former president of the Maine Dental Association, on potato consumption and childrens health:

Our senators' argument, which appears to have originated with the potato industry, is that the potato is full of nutrients. In a recent press release, Snowe detailed all the healthful components of the potato, but neglected to mention its established association with obesity.

Collins claimed that the potato is much healthier than iceberg lettuce, which is low on nutrients. Iceberg lettuce, however, is not associated with weight gain and obesity.

I decided to call my medical colleagues in Maine and throughout the United States to hear their opinions about the Institute of Medicine's recommended changes in school nutrition.

Physicians were unanimous in their belief that we must moderate potato consumption among children in the country to tackle the obesity epidemic. No one I spoke with supported the senators' views...

Their political strategy, not based on scientific evidence, greatly concerns me.