Front Page
NMJ Search
NMJ Radio
Constitutional Literacy
NMJ Shop
Links, Etc...
Site Information
About Us
Contact Us
  US Senate
  US House

Social Bookmarking
Print this page.
The Tyranny of the Harry Reid
Dave Hoppe
July 3, 2014
Patience and reliability are the defining characteristics of successful leadership in the Senate. Good Senate majority leaders work through the rules of the Senate, which protect minority rights, to find a way to please a majority (or possibly a supermajority) of senators and move legislation and nominations to passage. They keep their commitments to open debate, even when their partisan colleagues would prefer to use simple majority power to crush the minority and avoid tough votes or compromises.

The Senate once prided itself on being "the world's greatest deliberative body." That it no longer is. According to the Congressional Research Service, Senator Harry Reid (D-Nev.) has obstructed the amendment process for his colleagues 85 times -- more than double the total of his six predecessors combined. Neither Republican nor Democrat senators can offer amendments. This negates every senator's right to debate and amend legislation and thus fully represent his or her constituents.

This was especially evident in May, when Senator Reid killed three bipartisan pieces of legislation in as many weeks. First, he refused to allow even a limited number of amendments to bipartisan energy legislation. The following week, he blocked amendments to a bipartisan tax-extenders bill. Finally, he reached into the Senate Judiciary Committee to torpedo a bipartisan patent bill the committee was poised to mark up. These are the types of bills that passed routinely when the regular order of open debate and amendments was followed in the Senate.

The atmosphere in the Senate has soured due to Senator Reid's stranglehold on the legislative process. It has been made worse by his failure to keep his repeated -- and very specific -- promise to follow the Senate's rules. At the beginning of the 112th Congress, he acknowledged on the Senate floor that "the proper way to change Senate rules is through the procedures established in those rules," and he committed to "oppose any effort in this Congress or the next to change the Senate's rules other than through the regular order."

Despite this very clear commitment, Senator Reid threatened to break the Senate's rules at the beginning of this Congress. After Republicans agreed to procedural changes that gave the Democrat majority powers greater than those of any previous majority in the history of the Senate, Reid again unequivocally committed to follow the rules of the Senate.

But then he tried to obtain more. Last November, Senator Reid and the White House provoked a fight to make sure -- "one way or the other," as Senator Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) admitted -- that the D.C. Circuit would have a majority of Democrat judges who would support President Obama's actions.

In 2005, Senate Republicans talked about using the nuclear option when Senate Democrats ill-advisedly set the precedent of filibustering circuit-court nominees -- but they never pulled the trigger. Why? Discussing it was a means to an end -- a way to confirm President Bush's circuit-court nominees. Through perseverance and the threat of the nuclear option, a deal by the bipartisan Gang of 14 was struck, and most of those nominees were confirmed. And the rules of the Senate remained intact.

For Senator Reid, the nuclear option -- and the power that went with it -- was the end itself. He broke his promise and broke the Senate's rules. And he did not try any regular-order mechanisms before doing so.

In 2000, Marsha Berzon and Richard Paez, two controversial Clinton nominees to the Ninth Circuit, had been held up for years. Most Republican senators opposed voting on their nominations. So did the Republican base. But Majority Leader Trent Lott had promised a vote on the nominations on the Senate floor and, acting against the advice of his Republican colleagues, he brought the nominations forward for a vote. Both were confirmed. Senator Lott knew that keeping his commitments was the right thing to do for the Senate.

The true skill of a majority leader lies in using the Senate rules to get things done and in keeping your word, even if it means voting on legislation some colleagues don't like or taking more time and effort to get nominations passed. The fabric of the Senate has been shredded by Senator Reid's failure to appreciate these two most basic qualities of leadership. Worse, his contempt for the established and tested rules of the Senate has eradicated important minority rights, robbing many Americans of a voice in the Senate.

Dave Hoppe was chief of staff to Senate majority leader Trent Lott and Senate Republican whip Jon Kyl. He is president of Hoppe Strategies, a lobbying and consulting firm.

This article was originally featured in National Review Online. Refer to original article for related links and important documentation.

The informational and educational pamphlet series is now available for Kindle and iPad. Click here to find out more...

The New Media Journal and are not funded by outside sources. We exist exclusively on donations from our readers and contributors.
Please make a sustaining donation today.

Opinions expressed by contributing writers are expressly their own and may or may not represent the opinions of, its editorial staff, board or organization.  Reprint inquiries should be directed to the author of the article. Contact the editor for a link request to is not affiliated with any mainstream media organizations. is not supported by any political organization.  Responsibility for the accuracy of cited content is expressly that of the contributing author. All original content offered by is copyrighted. supports and its goal: the liberation of the American voter from partisan politics and special interests in government through the primary-source, fact-based education of the American people.

FAIR USE NOTICE: This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance a more in-depth understanding of critical issues facing the world. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 USC Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information go to: If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.

The Media © 1998-2014    Content Copyright © Individual authors
Powered by ExpressionEngine 1.70 and M3Server