Lincoln commits to opposing Card Check

posted at 8:49 am on April 7, 2009 by Ed Morrissey

Previously, Senator Blanche Lincoln (D-AR) had only wavered in public on Card Check, along with a few other Democrats.  Yesterday, she fully and publicly committed to opposing Big Labor’s crown jewel of legislation, which should drive the stake a little deeper into the heart of the Orwellian named Employee Free Choice Act.  Unlike Arlen Specter, Lincoln rejected the bill itself as well as its timing:

“I cannot support that bill,” Lincoln said, according to one attendee. “Cannot support that bill in its current form. Cannot support and will not support moving it forward in its current form.”

The measure, better known as the “card check” bill, has been fought by business groups and championed by labor, after intense lobbying by both factions. …

“While I may not have been clear about my position in the past, I am stating today that I cannot support Employee Free Choice Act in its current form and I can’t support efforts to bring it to Senate consideration in its current form,” Lincoln said in a statement late Monday afternoon.

Card Check now looks dead enough that Harry Reid may well decide not to bring it to the floor at all.  He has no Republican support, and this statement from Lincoln strongly implies that she will join a filibuster to keep Reid from “bring[ing] it to Senate consideration”.  Dianne Feinstein has indicated opposition, as have Tim Johnson and Ben Nelson, the latter who has also committed to a no vote.  He’s not going to come close to 60 votes, and he may in the end want to spare himself and Obama the embarrassment of Democrats supporting the Republican filibuster.

Thankfully, the secret ballot still means something to Americans.

Previous posts on Card Check:


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Sanity wins.

For now.

MarkTheGreat on April 7, 2009 at 8:53 AM

Scary Harry will be crying into his bran flakes.

becki51758 on April 7, 2009 at 8:53 AM

Not all Democrats are stupid.

tarpon on April 7, 2009 at 8:54 AM

Thank you Blanche Lincoln.

myrenovations on April 7, 2009 at 8:56 AM

There may be hope…..

DL13 on April 7, 2009 at 8:56 AM

Does this “speaking truth to power” make her “courageous“? I know there are other descriptions to describe any time Specter and Snowe vote lib, but it’s early. Help me out!

av8tr on April 7, 2009 at 8:57 AM

Poor unions. Sniff.

Socmodfiscon on April 7, 2009 at 8:59 AM

One brave,Liberal!

And a non consumeing Kool-Aid drinker!

There is hope after all!!

canopfor on April 7, 2009 at 8:59 AM

The first concrete sign of a break in the Ojuggernaut’s momentum. If we can garner opposition to more of his policies, maybe we can relegate him to the historical dustbin of incompetent and ineffective administrations.

backwoods conservative on April 7, 2009 at 9:01 AM

Thankfully, the secret ballot still means something to Americans.

What does it say when the people who are supposed to REPRESENT those views are in Congress, trying to strip us of the secret ballot?

amkun on April 7, 2009 at 9:01 AM

That poor woman with her poor picture.

ballz2wallz on April 7, 2009 at 9:01 AM

I don’t like her proviso – “in it’s present form.”
So if they change a word or two, does that make a difference?

Bambi on April 7, 2009 at 9:01 AM

If we can garner opposition to more of his policies, maybe we can relegate him to the historical dustbin of incompetent and ineffective administrations.

Exactly – thwart his agenda, throw out the Democrat majority in 2010, repeal all of his “accomplishments” and throw Bammy and Mammy’s worthless butts out of the White House in 2012.

All is not lost. Four years will go fast and Bammy standing on the curb of 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, suitcase in hand, on January 20, 2013 will be a sweet sight.

NoDonkey on April 7, 2009 at 9:03 AM

She opposes it in “it’s current form”.. so it’s time for a compromise, and time for the real goal of the unions.. “fast track”.
Watch the crooks (both Democrats and Republicans) in Congress line up to voice opposition now. Watch them get jumbo campaign contributions and then watch as they support the compromise bill. It happens over and over – it’s how the game is played. It’s how they stay in office.

popularpeoplesfront on April 7, 2009 at 9:03 AM

Derailed for now but the unions will hoist the train back on the track eventually.

sherry on April 7, 2009 at 9:06 AM

Yah, “in its present form” is liberal code for “throw something my way and you will have my support.” Sadly, too many reps believe in this behavior too.

I expect CC to be attached to some spending bill for which Ogabe has been campaigning as super-duper necessary, so that if the GOP makes too big a stink it would cost them in public opinion.

Ogabe will not be denied.

Bishop on April 7, 2009 at 9:08 AM

it’s how the game is played. It’s how they stay in office.

How do you know Obama really wants this to pass?

Even he knows this Bill will kill the economy. They can cover up what caused the economy to crash, but they can’t cover up the result.

If the economy is still screwed in 2011 and 2012, Obama is out on his ass. He doesn’t want that. Lincoln gives him cover to not sign the Bill.

NoDonkey on April 7, 2009 at 9:13 AM

Hrm… think somebody got a visit from their WalMart management constituents?

This bill would surely result in the eventual unionization of that company. Which would lead to them reducing workforce and raising prices.

Whatever her reasons, she’s now right. And that counts for something, doesn’t it?

hawksruleva on April 7, 2009 at 9:19 AM

No great foundation of principles in this decision for her. She’s up in 2010. She had to do this. Biden pretty much gave her carte blanche a few weeks ago to go against the administration if she has to for purposes of reelection.

CP on April 7, 2009 at 9:19 AM

Scary when we have to rely on Democrats.

Real scary.

artist on April 7, 2009 at 9:20 AM

Biden pretty much gave her carte blanche

I see what you did there. Clever.

Bishop on April 7, 2009 at 9:22 AM

canopfor on April 7, 2009 at 8:59 AM

Not brave, canop, scared.

Oldnuke on April 7, 2009 at 9:22 AM

Thank heaven for small favors.

petefrt on April 7, 2009 at 9:26 AM

There is something so unAmerican about CardCheck that it amazes me it got as far as it did.

Blake on April 7, 2009 at 9:29 AM

Does this “speaking truth to power” make her “courageous“? I know there are other descriptions to describe any time Specter and Snowe vote lib, but it’s early. Help me out!

av8tr on April 7, 2009 at 8:57 AM

I know libs are stupid and dense, but man you are ridiculously so.

Saving small business shouldn’t be a Democrat/Republican argument, but we all know that most Democrats don’t want people to succeed. Fortunately there are still some Democrats out there that actually want individuals to better their lives.

MobileVideoEngineer on April 7, 2009 at 9:30 AM

A small bit of seemingly good news, but remember it came from a politician. Don’t trust her.

With their weapons of mass distraction, and real but exaggerated crises happeningly weekly it seems, don’t put it past the RePO gov’t to do some back door shenanigans to ram this through, the country & American businesses be damned.

ornery_independent on April 7, 2009 at 9:30 AM

repeal all of his “accomplishments”

NoDonkey on April 7, 2009 at 9:03 AM

We would need at least 66 senators, in order to override Barry’s vetos. That’s assuming the Maine two, don’t continue to vote with the Democrats.

MarkTheGreat on April 7, 2009 at 9:31 AM

Thankfully, the secret ballot still means something to Americans.

Absolutely and simply put, the secret ballot defines the American way vs. coercive Socialist fascism.

Reid had better check his back on this. Obama can’t force Nevada to re-elect Reid. Given Card Check in his pocket, Reid is unlikely to get re-elected because voters still enjoy the secret ballot.

So how about it, Nevada? Do YOU want to relinquish the secret ballot or are you willing to kick Reid out of office at election, sooner than later? Don’t moronize this into extremism, because the point made IS the logical conclusion following Reid’s path to infamy.

maverick muse on April 7, 2009 at 9:33 AM

Whoever funded the Maine women put them in Barry’s pocket.

I noticed other legislation bearing Snow’s name. She puts RINOs to shame with her extreme postures.

maverick muse on April 7, 2009 at 9:37 AM

Blake on April 7, 2009 at 9:29 AM

The first time I heard of it I thought it was a mistake. I could not believe that any sane American would even proposes such a thing. Talk about destroying core principles.

Oldnuke on April 7, 2009 at 9:44 AM

On the other hand, they can probably sucker the Unions to pour more money into the 2010 elections by keeping this thing just out of reach in the meantime.

A Balrog of Morgoth on April 7, 2009 at 9:55 AM

They can cut, and they can run, but Democrats own Card Check.

DannoJyd on April 7, 2009 at 10:06 AM

Does this “speaking truth to power” make her “courageous“? I know there are other descriptions to describe any time Specter and Snowe vote lib, but it’s early. Help me out!

av8tr on April 7, 2009 at 8:57 AM

I know libs are stupid and dense, but man you are ridiculously so.

Saving small business shouldn’t be a Democrat/Republican argument, but we all know that most Democrats don’t want people to succeed. Fortunately there are still some Democrats out there that actually want individuals to better their lives.

MobileVideoEngineer on April 7, 2009 at 9:30 AM

Don’t even know where to begin with this one, you nutbar.

But I’d sure be eager to hear which elected Democrat in government “actually want individuals to better their lives.”

I would encourage you, MobileVideoEngineer, to come on up out of your mommy’s basement and join the rest of the world.

av8tr on April 7, 2009 at 10:08 AM

That makes two key Senators facing reelection next year who have come out in opposition to Card Check.

Are you getting the message yet, Harry??

rockmom on April 7, 2009 at 10:37 AM

Looks like she gets it.
No one has imposed as many success blocks to small business in such a short time as obama. An economy comes back with small companies hiring before large ones expand. The card check mess at best will help temp firms.

seven on April 7, 2009 at 10:43 AM

Saving small business shouldn’t be a Democrat/Republican argument, but we all know that most Democrats don’t want people to succeed. Fortunately there are still some Democrats out there that actually want individuals to better their lives.

MobileVideoEngineer

Come on, av8tr, that is not the rambling of a “nutbar”.
Granted, having that D after their name makes them radioactive at worst and suspect at best, but don’t you think you’re being a wee bit harsh? I admit I will never vote for another Democrat, ever (Billy Jeff cured me of that) but it’s not crazy to think that some conservative Dems may still be out there, albeit in hiding.

SKYFOX on April 7, 2009 at 10:46 AM

The unions are not going to take this lying down. They supported Obama, he supports Card Check. Obama owes them and they are not going to let him forget it.

GarandFan on April 7, 2009 at 11:00 AM

Don’t think she has a consense..she is running for re-election. Voting for Card Check in Arkansas would ruin her chances for re-election here. She votes with the block, just like Mark Pryor. I am embarressed at their representation of my state.

Razorsully on April 7, 2009 at 11:04 AM

Don’t think they’re done trying to get this passed. They’ll probably try to hide it in late-night, last minute legislation. They think they don’t work for us anymore. It’s time to remind them strongly that they do.

Christian Conservative on April 7, 2009 at 11:09 AM

Yes it is true I oppose card check, but Ed you have the wrong picture up there, I think that is AP’s Senior Picture.

LincolntheHun on April 7, 2009 at 11:30 AM

How bout those cousin lovers from Arkansas. Yeah sometimes they can make some sense. Good for her.

FlyoverJ-HawkFan on April 7, 2009 at 11:35 AM

when are we going to get the resignation of the union chief executive? What is fair to the CEO of GM should be fair to the Union. They should share in the blame, but no, that would cost votes.

workingforpigs on April 7, 2009 at 12:15 PM

Lincoln commits to opposing Card Check

Bentonville strongarmed her.

sethstorm on April 7, 2009 at 12:55 PM

when are we going to get the resignation of the union chief executive? What is fair to the CEO of GM should be fair to the Union. They should share in the blame, but no, that would cost votes.

workingforpigs on April 7, 2009 at 12:15 PM

I agree 100%. The UAW chief should be the first to go. I am a retired union member and I can’t think of anything as distasteful as CARD CHECK.
I’m glad there are some democrats who can think for themselves.

dalec on April 7, 2009 at 12:58 PM

But, but, if everyone is in a union, we’ll all make decent living wages, work less, get pensions and have time off for any purpose whatsoever!

emerson7 on April 7, 2009 at 1:05 PM

Thank you Blanche Lincoln.

myrenovations on April 7, 2009 at 8:56 AM

And, thank you, WALMART!

mrsmwp on April 7, 2009 at 2:11 PM

Do. Not. Get. Complacent.

Big Labor won’t give up easily. They have too much invested — in a very literal sense — to let this go.

Like the Terminator, they’ll be back.

Paul_in_NJ on April 7, 2009 at 2:42 PM

I wouldn’t get too excited. Lincoln is far from being a liberal, and I think she’s pretty much represented us fairly here in Arkansas, but she also voted for TARP Parts 1 through 4,526, and the Porkulus bill, and the Budget from Hell. It’s politically expedient for her to oppose Card Check. Of course Wal-Mart and Tyson have something to do with that, but the people of this state don’t want unions here either, and for much the same reason the corporations don’t. The fact that she feels the need to qualify her opposition with repeated references to “not in its current form” makes me think she’d be open to it at some point in some other form. It would probably get her tossed out of office here, but I’m not sure she’d care. She quit her seat once before when her twins were born and ran again several years later.

NoLeftTurn on April 7, 2009 at 2:43 PM

I’d hit it.

UltimateBob on April 7, 2009 at 2:51 PM

I don’t like her proviso – “in it’s present form.”
So if they change a word or two, does that make a difference?

Bambi on April 7, 2009 at 9:01 AM

I also don’t like the fact that she doesn’t say *why* she wouldn’t sign it. Repeats the “present form” tagline three times, and not a word *about* the present form. Doesn’t the public have the right to know what’s so objectionable about this bill? (It’s not as if the media is giving anyone a clue, so…what’s this all *about*, sweetie?)

Very disappointing.

RD on April 8, 2009 at 6:31 AM