<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Salon.com > U.S. Senate</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.salon.com/topic/us_senate/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.salon.com</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 16 Feb 2012 16:25:54 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>Democrats can&#8217;t count on Kerrey</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2012/01/12/democrats_cant_count_on_kerrey/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2012/01/12/democrats_cant_count_on_kerrey/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 12 Jan 2012 20:13:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[U.S. Senate]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Bob Kerrey]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.origin.railrode.net/?p=12120381</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<p>Given the tenuousness of Democratic control of the U.S. Senate, I imagine more than a few people in Washington are hoping former Sen. Bob Kerrey will run for the seat vacated by retiring Democratic Sen. Ben Nelson. As both <a href="http://m.journalstar.com/news/state-and-regional/govt-and-politics/bob-kerrey-may-jump-into-senate-race/article_932ba7f2-4f8a-5f17-a763-3b10dc402fb3.html">local</a> and <a href="http://www.salon.com/2012/01/07/kerrey_ponders_run_for_nebraska_us_senate_seat/">national</a> sources are reporting, Kerrey is seriously exploring the bid – and Republicans are taking his possible entrance <a href="http://mobile.thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/senate-races/203779-crossroads-goes-after-kerrey-in-ne">just as seriously</a>. Operatives of both parties seem to agree that he may be the only Democrat who could hold the seat. I hope that he makes the race. But I don't think he will.</p><p>First, some politicos call Kerrey a serial floater. They refer to his frequent Hamlet routine, in which he contemplates but ultimately declines to run for various offices: in <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/1998/12/14/us/bob-kerrey-rules-out-a-run-for-the-white-house-in-2000.html">2000</a> for president, in <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2005/04/17/nyregion/metrocampaigns/17kerrey.html">2005</a> for New York City mayor, and in <a href="http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2007/10/24/kerrey-opts-out-of-senate-run/">2008</a> for the last open U.S. Senate seat in Nebraska.</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2012/01/12/democrats_cant_count_on_kerrey/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Read this story at <a href="http://www.salon.com/2012/01/12/democrats_cant_count_on_kerrey/">http://www.salon.com/2012/01/12/democrats_cant_count_on_kerrey/</a></p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2012/01/12/democrats_cant_count_on_kerrey/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2012/01/12/democrats_cant_count_on_kerrey/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>16</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Politico presents the world&#8217;s worst piece of Senate reporting</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2011/11/04/politico_presents_the_worlds_worst_piece_of_senate_reporting/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2011/11/04/politico_presents_the_worlds_worst_piece_of_senate_reporting/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 04 Nov 2011 14:04:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[U.S. Senate]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Unemployment]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Republican Party]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Joe Lieberman]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Ben Nelson]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Politico]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Media]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Media Criticism]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.origin.railrode.net/?p=10161768</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<p>Politico gets a gold star today for <a href="http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1111/67568.html">writing a story that could be used by journalism professors</a> as a textbook example of everything that is wrong with mainstream reporting on Congress. The story is about "Senate gridlock," responsibility for which rests with "both parties."</p><p>Here's the first sentence:</p><blockquote><p>Rival Democratic and Republican jobs bills failed in the Senate on Thursday, the latest sign of the partisan gridlock gripping Washington as Americans look for relief from high unemployment and a sagging economy.</p></blockquote><p>"Partisan gridlock" is to blame for the failure of "jobs bills" from each party.</p><p>Which partisans, exactly?</p><blockquote><p>Senate Democrats on Thursday came up nine votes short of the 60 needed to advance their infrastructure bill past a key procedural hurdle. The vote was 51-49, with all Republicans and two members of the Democratic caucus — Joe Lieberman (I-Conn.) and Ben Nelson (D-Neb.) — voting no.</p></blockquote><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2011/11/04/politico_presents_the_worlds_worst_piece_of_senate_reporting/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Read this story at <a href="http://www.salon.com/2011/11/04/politico_presents_the_worlds_worst_piece_of_senate_reporting/">http://www.salon.com/2011/11/04/politico_presents_the_worlds_worst_piece_of_senate_reporting/</a></p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2011/11/04/politico_presents_the_worlds_worst_piece_of_senate_reporting/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2011/11/04/politico_presents_the_worlds_worst_piece_of_senate_reporting/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>52</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Ben Nelson: Please don&#8217;t seek reelection!</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2011/11/02/ben_nelson_please_dont_seek_reelection/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2011/11/02/ben_nelson_please_dont_seek_reelection/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 02 Nov 2011 19:30:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Ben Nelson]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[U.S. Senate]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[2012 Elections]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Democratic Party]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[War Room]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.origin.railrode.net/?p=10160907</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://journalstar.com/news/state-and-regional/govt-and-politics/article_0473f062-6c84-55f4-9171-eab01b7bcd5d.html">According to the Lincoln Journal Star,</a> Senator Ben Nelson has not yet decided whether or not to run for reelection. Consider this my open letter to the distinguished Democrat from Nebraska: Please, please, I beg you, Senator Ben Nelson, do not run for reelection.</p><blockquote><p>"I'll sit down with my family to discuss the future," Nelson said Tuesday during a telephone interview. "They are my sounding board. I value what they say."</p>
<p>Nelson said he will weigh his family's views along with a personal judgment on "whether I believe I have a role to play in dealing with a very divided Congress in a very divided country, whether I could be constructive in finding some solutions, whether I am convinced I can be a positive force for the following six years."</p></blockquote><p>Senator Nelson, you have never been a "positive force" during your time in office thus far, and it seems unlikely that you will become one at any point in the next six years.</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2011/11/02/ben_nelson_please_dont_seek_reelection/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Read this story at <a href="http://www.salon.com/2011/11/02/ben_nelson_please_dont_seek_reelection/">http://www.salon.com/2011/11/02/ben_nelson_please_dont_seek_reelection/</a></p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2011/11/02/ben_nelson_please_dont_seek_reelection/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2011/11/02/ben_nelson_please_dont_seek_reelection/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>26</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>America&#8217;s broken Senate unlikely to confirm many judges next year</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2011/10/20/americas_broken_senate_unlikely_to_confirm_many_judges_next_year/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2011/10/20/americas_broken_senate_unlikely_to_confirm_many_judges_next_year/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 20 Oct 2011 19:28:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[U.S. Senate]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Republican Party]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[2012 Elections]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Congress]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.origin.railrode.net/?p=10131029</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<p>Our useless vestigial Senate remains a lavish old folk's home for America's worst people, and it will only get worse next year. Joe Lieberman has announced his intention to block a bill that will send states money to hire and retain public employees, because he is Joe Lieberman, the mascot of all this is awful and detestable about the world's most deliberative body. This after Senate Republicans "defeated" the larger jobs bill by preventing it from being debated in a vote that they won with a minority. That is business as usual, reported by the objective political press <a href="http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2011/10/chronicles-of-false-equivalence-chapter-2-817/246667/">as "gridlock"</a> that "both sides" are responsible for. And as Al Kamen writes today, <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/looking-for-a-seat-on-the-federal-bench-fuhgeddaboutit/2011/10/18/gIQAalHOvL_story.html?wprss=rss_politics&amp;wpisrc=nl_wonk">the Senate's slow trickle of judicial confirmations</a> will likely cease once the presidential election is underway.</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2011/10/20/americas_broken_senate_unlikely_to_confirm_many_judges_next_year/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Read this story at <a href="http://www.salon.com/2011/10/20/americas_broken_senate_unlikely_to_confirm_many_judges_next_year/">http://www.salon.com/2011/10/20/americas_broken_senate_unlikely_to_confirm_many_judges_next_year/</a></p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2011/10/20/americas_broken_senate_unlikely_to_confirm_many_judges_next_year/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2011/10/20/americas_broken_senate_unlikely_to_confirm_many_judges_next_year/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>29</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Harry Reid&#8217;s wimpy Senate reforms</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2011/10/14/harry_reids_wimpy_senate_reforms/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2011/10/14/harry_reids_wimpy_senate_reforms/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 14 Oct 2011 15:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[U.S. Senate]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.origin.railrode.net/?p=10113222</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<p>Senate reform is back in the news, thanks to some incredibly obscure procedural shenanigans on the Senate floor last week and a follow-up <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/trying-to-restore-senate-comity/2011/10/10/gIQAjkb3aL_story.html">Op-Ed</a> by Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid in Washington Post. The narrow issue concerned filibuster rules but the broader issue is how to fix dysfunctional Washington.</p><p>The news was not good. For those who believe that the Senate is unable to function properly under current rules and practices, however, neither the very minor change in precedent nor Reid’s Op-Ed -- which blamed Republicans for abuse but didn’t even hint at doing anything further about it -- were very encouraging. Indeed, for anyone who wants to retain the Senate’s old traditions and advantages, the time to reform Senate rules is as soon as possible -- because otherwise the Senate is most likely going to wind up as a second House of Representatives.</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2011/10/14/harry_reids_wimpy_senate_reforms/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Senate reform is back in the news, thanks to some incredibly obscure procedural shenanigans on the Senate floor last week and a follow-up <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/trying-to-restore-senate-comity/2011/10/10/gIQAjkb3aL_story.html">Op-Ed</a> by Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid in Washington Post. The narrow issue concerned filibuster rules but the broader issue is how to fix dysfunctional Washington.</p><p>The news was not good. For those who believe that the Senate is unable to function properly under current rules and practices, however, neither the very minor change in precedent nor Reid’s Op-Ed &#8212; which blamed Republicans for abuse but didn’t even hint at doing anything further about it &#8212; were very encouraging. Indeed, for anyone who wants to retain the Senate’s old traditions and advantages, the time to reform Senate rules is as soon as possible &#8212; because otherwise the Senate is most likely going to wind up as a second House of Representatives.</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2011/10/14/harry_reids_wimpy_senate_reforms/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2011/10/14/harry_reids_wimpy_senate_reforms/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>6</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>The Obama jobs plan&#8217;s Democratic enemies</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2011/10/12/the_obama_jobs_plans_democratic_enemies/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2011/10/12/the_obama_jobs_plans_democratic_enemies/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 12 Oct 2011 16:34:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[War Room]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[U.S. Senate]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.origin.railrode.net/?p=10108922</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<p>Officially, Senate Democrats <a href="http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-senate-jobs-20111012,0,3629865.story">failed last night</a> to muster the 60 votes they needed to break a Republican-led filibuster of a motion to proceed to debate on President Obama's job bill.</p><p>The upshot is that the $447 billion package that Obama rolled out in a speech to Congress in early September (and which Senate Democrats modified recently to include a 5.6 percent tax increase on millionaires) is now dead. But the White House and its allies are pushing hard to frame last night's vote as something of a victory anyway, because Majority Leader Harry Reid was able to convince 51 of his fellow Democrats to vote to proceed to debate, allowing Obama to say that:</p><blockquote><p>Tonight, a majority of United States Senators voted to advance the American Jobs Act. But even though this bill contains the kind of proposals Republicans have supported in the past, their party obstructed the Senate from moving forward on this jobs bill.</p></blockquote><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2011/10/12/the_obama_jobs_plans_democratic_enemies/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Read this story at <a href="http://www.salon.com/2011/10/12/the_obama_jobs_plans_democratic_enemies/">http://www.salon.com/2011/10/12/the_obama_jobs_plans_democratic_enemies/</a></p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2011/10/12/the_obama_jobs_plans_democratic_enemies/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2011/10/12/the_obama_jobs_plans_democratic_enemies/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>39</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Protesters descend on Senate office building</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2011/10/11/protesters_descend_on_senate_office_building/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2011/10/11/protesters_descend_on_senate_office_building/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 11 Oct 2011 17:20:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Occupy Wall Street]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[U.S. Senate]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.origin.railrode.net/?p=10107868</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<p>While demonstrators in New York <a href="http://newyork.cbslocal.com/2011/10/11/occupy-wall-street-protesters-plan-millionaires-march-on-the-upper-east-side/">march</a> their way through the symbolic epicenter of Manhattan privilege, the Upper East Side, their counterparts in the nation's capital are taking their cause to the seat of government. According to Talking Points Memo, a group of about 100 anti-war protesters -- organized by activist groups Stop the Machine and October 2011 -- attempted to take over the atrium of the Senate Hart Office Building shortly before noon.</p><p>Per <a href="http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1011/65639.html#ixzz1aUmaJ6xX">Politico</a>:</p><blockquote><p>More than 100 protesters shouted “We are the 99 percent” and “Tax the rich, end the war” starting around 11:30 a.m. inside the Hart Senate Office Building. They waved banners that read “End the War” and “Cure Electile Dysfunction.” Senate staffers were warned by Capitol Police to avoid the building’s atrium</p></blockquote><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2011/10/11/protesters_descend_on_senate_office_building/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Read this story at <a href="http://www.salon.com/2011/10/11/protesters_descend_on_senate_office_building/">http://www.salon.com/2011/10/11/protesters_descend_on_senate_office_building/</a></p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2011/10/11/protesters_descend_on_senate_office_building/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2011/10/11/protesters_descend_on_senate_office_building/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>10</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Republicans wage war on good government, and no one notices</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2011/09/13/fema_funding_broken/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2011/09/13/fema_funding_broken/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 13 Sep 2011 14:45:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[U.S. Senate]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[War Room]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Hurricanes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Republican Party]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.salon.com/news/politics//war_room/2011/09/13/fema_funding_broken</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<p>Republicans are probably just as surprised as anyone that it turns out that there are no political consequences for unprecedented legislative obstructionism. They have just kept at it for so long that it's no longer a fresh story. It has, in fact, become just the way things are, that proposals that in past Congresses would've been utterly uncontroversial a few years ago now require 60 votes to be considered. Did you know that a vote to fund FEMA failed in the Senate yesterday?</p><p>It failed, of course, <a href="http://thehill.com/blogs/floor-action/senate/181017-senate-fails-to-advance-vehicle-for-fema-funding">with a majority of the vote.</a> Fifty-three voted to proceed with the bill, and 33 senators voted no. The $6.9 billion in funding was attached to a non-controversial bill renewing sanctions on the government of Burma. Only one senator bothered to argue against the bill before a small minority quietly blocked it.</p><blockquote>
<p>&#8220;Has anybody given any serious thought to that? &#8220;asked Sessions. &#8220;Seven billion dollars? The state of Alabama&#8217;s general budget is $2 billion. Seven billion is a lot of money. We have not looked at it, we have not thought about it.&#8221;</p>
<p>&#8220;I strongly oppose adding another debt spending bill that we haven&#8217;t carefully examined every penny of it to make sure it&#8217;s all necessary and appropriate,&#8221; Sessions continued.</p>
</blockquote><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2011/09/13/fema_funding_broken/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Read this story at <a href="http://www.salon.com/2011/09/13/fema_funding_broken/">http://www.salon.com/2011/09/13/fema_funding_broken/</a></p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2011/09/13/fema_funding_broken/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2011/09/13/fema_funding_broken/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>146</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>David Vitter complains about having to vote instead of going to a party</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2011/09/08/vitter_complains/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2011/09/08/vitter_complains/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 08 Sep 2011 23:01:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[David Vitter]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[War Room]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Republican Party]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[U.S. Senate]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.salon.com/news/politics//war_room/2011/09/08/vitter_complains</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<p>David Vitter, a Republican senator from Louisiana known solely now and until the end of history for enjoying the company of prostitutes, had a great idea: He was going to petulantly skip Barack Obama's speech to Congress about his jobs proposal, and go to a football party instead. This would show his constituents how much contempt he has for Barack Obama, because that is how Republicans prove seriousness, these days. Well, <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/2chambers/post/reid-turns-tables-on-obama-speech-skippers-by-setting-thursday-night-debt-vote/2011/09/08/gIQAH8kRCK_blog.html">Harry Reid scheduled some votes for after the speech</a>, just as a sort of mildly amusing "screw you" to the high-profile skippers.</p><p>David Vitter is <a href="http://wonkette.com/452796/angry-david-vitter-busts-out-his-best-white-guy-jive-talk">not happy!</a> He is so unhappy he immediately emailed his supporters to whine and carry on about the grave injustice of David Vitter having to go vote on stuff instead of watching a football game, at a party.</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2011/09/08/vitter_complains/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Read this story at <a href="http://www.salon.com/2011/09/08/vitter_complains/">http://www.salon.com/2011/09/08/vitter_complains/</a></p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2011/09/08/vitter_complains/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2011/09/08/vitter_complains/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>38</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Erick Erickson to insurgent candidate: Sorry, my bosses are friends with George Allen</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2011/08/24/erick_erickson_bosses/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2011/08/24/erick_erickson_bosses/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 24 Aug 2011 18:25:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[2012 Elections]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[War Room]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Republican Party]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Tea Parties]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[U.S. Senate]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.salon.com/news/politics//war_room/2011/08/24/erick_erickson_bosses</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<p>Erick Erickson is a popular and influential Republican blogger because his name is fun to write and say. At least I think that's why he's popular and influential. It certainly isn't because he's a deep thinker or brilliant strategist or compelling writer or independent voice. He masquerades as the last one, but <a href="http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0811/Publishers_social_ties_pushed_RedState_toward_Allen.html">Ben Smith today brings word</a> of Erickson aiding a consummate hack establishment Republican politician because Erickson's bosses are regulars on the dreaded cocktail party circuit.</p><p>George Allen, the former senator from Virginia notable primarily for being <a href="http://www.salon.com/news/politics/war_room/2011/04/07/allen_racism_again">as casually racist</a> as a senator from Virginia twice his age, is running for Senate again. Erickson initially opposed Allen, preferring a more Tea Partyish challenger named Jamie Radtke. Then he stopped mentioning the Radtke campaign, and then he didn't invite Radtke to his "RedState convention." He explained why in an email:</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2011/08/24/erick_erickson_bosses/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Read this story at <a href="http://www.salon.com/2011/08/24/erick_erickson_bosses/">http://www.salon.com/2011/08/24/erick_erickson_bosses/</a></p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2011/08/24/erick_erickson_bosses/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2011/08/24/erick_erickson_bosses/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>14</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Why the Senate should reject the debt ceiling deal</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2011/08/02/why_senate_should_reject_debt_deal/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2011/08/02/why_senate_should_reject_debt_deal/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 02 Aug 2011 15:03:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Budget Showdown]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[War Room]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[U.S. Senate]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.salon.com/news/politics//war_room/2011/08/02/why_senate_should_reject_debt_deal</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<p><em>This article originally appeared on</em> <a href="http://www.newdeal20.org/2011/08/02/vote-no-to-the-debt-deal-and-call-in-the-constitution-53528/"><em>New Deal 2.0</em></a>.</p><p>&#160;</p><p>The debt deal is bad economics, dishonest government, and surrender to blackmail. The alternative is not default, but government under the Constitution.</p><p>On the economics: by slowly choking off public services, public investment and regulation, the deal sets the economy on a path to strangulation. Every dollar cut from the budget, now or later, is a dollar less of private income. Less private income means less consumption, less private business investment, fewer jobs. Tax revenues will fall, and the deficits and debt will in the end not be reduced. The so-called &#8220;cloud of debt&#8221; will not lift. Contrary to the foolish claim made by the White House today, there is no magic by which &#8220;lifting a cloud of uncertainty&#8221; produces growth. There is no confidence fairy.</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2011/08/02/why_senate_should_reject_debt_deal/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><em>This article originally appeared on</em> <a href="http://www.newdeal20.org/2011/08/02/vote-no-to-the-debt-deal-and-call-in-the-constitution-53528/"><em>New Deal 2.0</em></a>.</p><p>&#160;</p><p>The debt deal is bad economics, dishonest government, and surrender to blackmail. The alternative is not default, but government under the Constitution.</p><p>On the economics: by slowly choking off public services, public investment and regulation, the deal sets the economy on a path to strangulation. Every dollar cut from the budget, now or later, is a dollar less of private income. Less private income means less consumption, less private business investment, fewer jobs. Tax revenues will fall, and the deficits and debt will in the end not be reduced. The so-called &#8220;cloud of debt&#8221; will not lift. Contrary to the foolish claim made by the White House today, there is no magic by which &#8220;lifting a cloud of uncertainty&#8221; produces growth. There is no confidence fairy.</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2011/08/02/why_senate_should_reject_debt_deal/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2011/08/02/why_senate_should_reject_debt_deal/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>47</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Lobbyists are overtaking Congress</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2011/07/13/lobbyists_congress_revolving_door/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2011/07/13/lobbyists_congress_revolving_door/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 13 Jul 2011 16:14:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Washington, D.C.]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[War Room]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[U.S. House of Representatives]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[U.S. Senate]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.salon.com/news/politics//war_room/2011/07/13/lobbyists_congress_revolving_door</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<p>
    <strong>(Updated below)</strong>
  </p><p>A new report from the <a href="http://www.opensecrets.org/news/2011/07/from-hired-guns-to-hired-hands.html">Center for Responsive Politics</a> (CRP) looks at the pervasiveness of former lobbyists now working in congressional staff positions. The number of former lobbyists in Congress has more than doubled between the last Congress and the current one, with a significant partisan skew. In the current 112th Congress, 79 former lobbyists work for Republicans while 48 for Democrats; during the Democratic-led 111th Congress (which ran from 2009-2010), 33 worked for Democrats, while 27 worked for Republicans.</p><p>The report, titled "From Hired Guns to Hired Hands: 'Reverse Revolvers' in the 111th and 112th Congresses," is available in full <a href="http://www.opensecrets.org/news/Hired%20Guns%20to%20Hired%20Hands.pdf">here</a> and has a number of noteworthy takeaways:</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2011/07/13/lobbyists_congress_revolving_door/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Read this story at <a href="http://www.salon.com/2011/07/13/lobbyists_congress_revolving_door/">http://www.salon.com/2011/07/13/lobbyists_congress_revolving_door/</a></p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2011/07/13/lobbyists_congress_revolving_door/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2011/07/13/lobbyists_congress_revolving_door/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>10</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Lessons from the swipe fee war</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2011/06/30/congress_swipe_fees_battle/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2011/06/30/congress_swipe_fees_battle/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 30 Jun 2011 17:01:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[U.S. Senate]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[U.S. House of Representatives]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Wal-Mart]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.salon.com/news/david_sirota/2011/06/30/congress_swipe_fees_battle</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<p>For the average American, the most significant aspect of the recent congressional war over "swipe fees" (i.e. the money merchants pay banks when customers use debit cards) has little to do with the specific issue at hand. After all, while retailers managed to wage what <a href="http://www.bloomberg.com/news/print/2011-06-28/how-wal-mart-swiped-jpmorgan-in-16-billion-debit-card-battle.html">Bloomberg News</a> called a "surprise victorious assault" on the all-powerful banking industry, there's no guarantee swipe-fee savings will be passed onto consumers. In many cases, the fees will simply be pocketed by retailers, with customers seeing no benefit whatsoever. And even the savings that are passed onto consumers will likely be small after the Federal Reserve this week <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/06/29/swipe-fees-cap-federal-reserve-wall-street_n_887193.html">capitulated</a> to Wall Street's demands.</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2011/06/30/congress_swipe_fees_battle/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Read this story at <a href="http://www.salon.com/2011/06/30/congress_swipe_fees_battle/">http://www.salon.com/2011/06/30/congress_swipe_fees_battle/</a></p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2011/06/30/congress_swipe_fees_battle/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2011/06/30/congress_swipe_fees_battle/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>7</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Senate to work next week on debt limit impasse</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2011/06/30/us_debt_showdown_3/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2011/06/30/us_debt_showdown_3/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 30 Jun 2011 14:50:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Budget Showdown]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[War Room]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[U.S. Senate]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.salon.com/news/politics//war_room/2011/06/30/us_debt_showdown_3</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<p>The Senate has abandoned plans for a July 4 break and instead will work next week as lawmakers race the clock in an attempt to strike a compromise on avoiding a government default and reducing mammoth federal deficits.</p><p>Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., announced the scheduling change Thursday, a day after President Barack Obama prodded lawmakers to act swiftly to extend the government's ability to borrow money. The Senate had been scheduled to take a week's break but instead will meet beginning Tuesday.</p><p>"We'll do that because we have work to do," Reid said on the Senate floor.</p><p>The House had already been scheduled to work next week.</p><p>Obama had insisted there is no more time to add. And he beseeched and badgered lawmakers to complete a deal to cut long-term deficits and lift the nation's debt ceiling before Aug. 2 to avoid what his administration says would be a calamitous government default.</p><p>"There's no point in putting it off," he said Wednesday. "We've got to get this done."</p><p>But neither Obama nor the divided Congress is making it easier. The White House has identified at least $1.3 trillion in spending cuts over 10 years and is proposing up to $400 billion in new tax revenue. Republicans want more spending cuts and no tax increases.</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2011/06/30/us_debt_showdown_3/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The Senate has abandoned plans for a July 4 break and instead will work next week as lawmakers race the clock in an attempt to strike a compromise on avoiding a government default and reducing mammoth federal deficits.</p><p>Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., announced the scheduling change Thursday, a day after President Barack Obama prodded lawmakers to act swiftly to extend the government&#8217;s ability to borrow money. The Senate had been scheduled to take a week&#8217;s break but instead will meet beginning Tuesday.</p><p>&#8220;We&#8217;ll do that because we have work to do,&#8221; Reid said on the Senate floor.</p><p>The House had already been scheduled to work next week.</p><p>Obama had insisted there is no more time to add. And he beseeched and badgered lawmakers to complete a deal to cut long-term deficits and lift the nation&#8217;s debt ceiling before Aug. 2 to avoid what his administration says would be a calamitous government default.</p><p>&#8220;There&#8217;s no point in putting it off,&#8221; he said Wednesday. &#8220;We&#8217;ve got to get this done.&#8221;</p><p>But neither Obama nor the divided Congress is making it easier. The White House has identified at least $1.3 trillion in spending cuts over 10 years and is proposing up to $400 billion in new tax revenue. Republicans want more spending cuts and no tax increases.</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2011/06/30/us_debt_showdown_3/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2011/06/30/us_debt_showdown_3/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>12</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Trying again with the DREAM Act</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2011/06/28/dream_act_senate_hearing/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2011/06/28/dream_act_senate_hearing/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 28 Jun 2011 18:29:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Immigration Reform]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[War Room]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Immigration]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[U.S. Senate]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.salon.com/news/politics//war_room/2011/06/28/dream_act_senate_hearing</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<p>In its various permutations since 2001, the DREAM Act, which&#160;would grant a path to citizenship for children brought to the United States illegally, has certainly done the rounds on Capitol Hill. But Tuesday saw its first ever Senate hearing. According to <a href="http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2011/06/28/6965314-impossible-dream-dems-push-dream-act-again">MSNBC's Domenico Montanaro</a>, "more than 200 people [were] in the room, including many students, who say they are undocumented and pushing for the passage of the bill."</p><p>Last December the bill failed in the Senate 55-41 (in what was its fifth roll out) and since the Republicans are now in the majority, the bill has no greater prospects this time round. However, its defenders are hoping an argument from economics might do the trick. Education Secretary Arne Duncan said in Tuesday testimony, "this is an investment not an expense."</p><p><a href="http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0611/57909.html#ixzz1Qaktp3ga">According to Politico</a>, "Duncan said the law would rescue the federal deficit by $1.4 billion in the next decade by making it possible for more illegal immigrants to stay in the country and pay taxes."</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2011/06/28/dream_act_senate_hearing/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Read this story at <a href="http://www.salon.com/2011/06/28/dream_act_senate_hearing/">http://www.salon.com/2011/06/28/dream_act_senate_hearing/</a></p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2011/06/28/dream_act_senate_hearing/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2011/06/28/dream_act_senate_hearing/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>25</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>U.S.-led nation-building could leave Afghanistan in a depression</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2011/06/08/senate_report_afghanistan_aid/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2011/06/08/senate_report_afghanistan_aid/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 08 Jun 2011 12:09:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Afghanistan]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[U.S. Senate]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2011/06/08/senate_report_afghanistan_aid</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<p>A Senate report released today is highly critical of U.S.-led nation-building efforts in Afghanistan, which has cost $18.8 billion over the past 10 years. The report, compiled over two years by Democrats on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, "comes as Congress and the American public have grown increasingly restive about the human and economic cost of the decade-long war and reflects growing concerns about Obama&#8217;s war strategy even among supporters within his party," the <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/national-security/afghan-nation-building-programs-not-sustainable-report-says/2011/06/07/AG5cPSLH_print.html">Washington Post</a> notes.</p><p>The State Department and U.S. Agency for International Development spend $320 million per month on aid efforts in areas that have been cleared of Taliban forces, but according to the report, "Afghanistan could suffer a severe economic depression when foreign troops leave in 2014 unless the proper planning begins now."</p><p>The crux of the report is that the highly expensive aid program funds short-term stabilization, which has limited success when it comes to long term development in the country.</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2011/06/08/senate_report_afghanistan_aid/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Read this story at <a href="http://www.salon.com/2011/06/08/senate_report_afghanistan_aid/">http://www.salon.com/2011/06/08/senate_report_afghanistan_aid/</a></p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2011/06/08/senate_report_afghanistan_aid/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2011/06/08/senate_report_afghanistan_aid/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>5</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Why can&#8217;t Obama get his own nominees approved?</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2011/06/07/executive_appointments_confirmation/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2011/06/07/executive_appointments_confirmation/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 07 Jun 2011 21:13:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Big Question]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[U.S. Senate]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[White House]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2011/06/07/executive_appointments_confirmation</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<p>A Nobel Prize in economics wasn't enough to secure Peter Diamond a spot on the Federal Reserve Board of Governors. And the M.I.T. professor's decision to <a href="http://www.salon.com/news/federal_reserve/index.html?story=/tech/htww/2011/06/06/peter_diamond_federal_reserve">withdraw from the Senate confirmation process</a> earlier this week has set off a new wave of debate about the dearth of executive appointments under the Obama administration. Who deserves more blame: Republicans on Capitol Hill, for their antagonistic posture toward Obama nominees; or the White House, for not pushing hard enough and making the nominees more of a priority?</p><p>We put that question and others to Dr. Jonathan Bernstein, a political scientist and author of "<a href="http://plainblogaboutpolitics.blogspot.com/">A Plain Blog About Politics</a>":</p><p>
    <strong>First, could you explain for the lay person a little bit about how the confirmation process actually works, and how it's tripped up appointees? Why is it that so many positions continue to lay vacant?</strong>
  </p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2011/06/07/executive_appointments_confirmation/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>A Nobel Prize in economics wasn&#8217;t enough to secure Peter Diamond a spot on the Federal Reserve Board of Governors. And the M.I.T. professor&#8217;s decision to <a href="http://www.salon.com/news/federal_reserve/index.html?story=/tech/htww/2011/06/06/peter_diamond_federal_reserve">withdraw from the Senate confirmation process</a> earlier this week has set off a new wave of debate about the dearth of executive appointments under the Obama administration. Who deserves more blame: Republicans on Capitol Hill, for their antagonistic posture toward Obama nominees; or the White House, for not pushing hard enough and making the nominees more of a priority?</p><p>We put that question and others to Dr. Jonathan Bernstein, a political scientist and author of &#8220;<a href="http://plainblogaboutpolitics.blogspot.com/">A Plain Blog About Politics</a>&#8220;:</p><p>
    <strong>First, could you explain for the lay person a little bit about how the confirmation process actually works, and how it&#8217;s tripped up appointees? Why is it that so many positions continue to lay vacant?</strong>
  </p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2011/06/07/executive_appointments_confirmation/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2011/06/07/executive_appointments_confirmation/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>17</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Evan Bayh creates new, awful job for self</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2011/06/07/evan_bayh_awful/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2011/06/07/evan_bayh_awful/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 07 Jun 2011 19:15:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Evan Bayh, D-Ind.]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[War Room]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[U.S. Senate]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.salon.com/news/politics//war_room/2011/06/07/evan_bayh_awful</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<p>Remember how Evan Bayh quit the Senate in a huff because he wanted to <strike>make a tremendous amount of money</strike> help create <em>one damn job</em> or whatever he said he was going to do? And remember how then he <a href="http://www.salon.com/news/politics/war_room/2011/03/14/evan_bayh_fox/index.html">became a lobbyist, joined a private equity firm, and signed with Fox News?</a> I'm thrilled to report that Evan Bayh has created a <em>fourth</em> job, for himself: <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/06/07/evan-bayh-chamber-of-commerce_n_872529.html">Shill for the U.S. Chamber of Commerce,</a> as they work to gut the EPA, SEC, OSHA, and the brand-new Consumer Financial Protection Bureau.</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2011/06/07/evan_bayh_awful/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Read this story at <a href="http://www.salon.com/2011/06/07/evan_bayh_awful/">http://www.salon.com/2011/06/07/evan_bayh_awful/</a></p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2011/06/07/evan_bayh_awful/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2011/06/07/evan_bayh_awful/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>8</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Nobel winner withdraws nomination for Fed board</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2011/06/06/us_diamond_fed_board/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2011/06/06/us_diamond_fed_board/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 06 Jun 2011 14:01:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Federal Reserve]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[U.S. Senate]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2011/06/06/us_diamond_fed_board</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<p>Nobel Prize-winning economist Peter Diamond is withdrawing his nomination for the Federal Reserve board.</p><p>In an op-ed piece first published on The New York Times website on Sunday and in its print edition on Monday, Diamond seemed frustrated by the confirmation process, detailing how President Barack Obama had nominated and re-nominated him to fill a vacancy on the seven-member board.</p><p>The Fed often operates with vacancies on its board. The board hasn't had every seat filled since 2006.</p><p>Diamond's initial nomination fizzled when the Senate adjourned in December without acting on it. When Obama resubmitted the nomination in January to the newly convened Senate, the Republicans held six additional seats, which was  expected to make the confirmation process more difficult.</p><p>Senate Republicans blocked a floor vote on Diamond's confirmation and have questioned his practical experience and research. Diamond is considered an authority on Social Security, pensions and taxation. He shared the Nobel Prize in economics that was awarded in October, with Diamond saying that his portion of the prize was for his work on unemployment and the labor market.</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2011/06/06/us_diamond_fed_board/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Nobel Prize-winning economist Peter Diamond is withdrawing his nomination for the Federal Reserve board.</p><p>In an op-ed piece first published on The New York Times website on Sunday and in its print edition on Monday, Diamond seemed frustrated by the confirmation process, detailing how President Barack Obama had nominated and re-nominated him to fill a vacancy on the seven-member board.</p><p>The Fed often operates with vacancies on its board. The board hasn&#8217;t had every seat filled since 2006.</p><p>Diamond&#8217;s initial nomination fizzled when the Senate adjourned in December without acting on it. When Obama resubmitted the nomination in January to the newly convened Senate, the Republicans held six additional seats, which was  expected to make the confirmation process more difficult.</p><p>Senate Republicans blocked a floor vote on Diamond&#8217;s confirmation and have questioned his practical experience and research. Diamond is considered an authority on Social Security, pensions and taxation. He shared the Nobel Prize in economics that was awarded in October, with Diamond saying that his portion of the prize was for his work on unemployment and the labor market.</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2011/06/06/us_diamond_fed_board/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2011/06/06/us_diamond_fed_board/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>11</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Rand Paul: Deport the Tea Partiers!</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2011/06/01/rand_paul_jail_tea_parties/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2011/06/01/rand_paul_jail_tea_parties/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 01 Jun 2011 18:15:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Rand Paul]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[War Room]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[2010 Elections]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Libertarianism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Republican Party]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[U.S. Senate]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.salon.com/news/politics//war_room/2011/06/01/rand_paul_jail_tea_parties</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<p>"Tea Party" Senator Randall "Rand" Paul (R-Ky.) says he supports free speech, but does he actually want his own supporters jailed for sedition? Definitely yes, according to a shocking audio recording!</p><p>Paul is mostly good on civil liberties -- he was one of the few senators to oppose the extension of the Patriot Act -- but he is also kind of dumb, and he often makes dumb arguments, especially when speaking extemporaneously. And that is how, on Sean Hannity's radio show last Friday, Rand Paul <a href="http://thinkprogress.org/politics/2011/05/31/232182/rand-paul-criminalize-speech/">announced his support for the deportation of Tea Partiers:</a></p><p>
    <iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="349" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/eVXWS8g4TAM" width="425"></iframe>
  </p><p>The transcript (emphasis <a href="http://thinkprogress.org/politics/2011/05/31/232182/rand-paul-criminalize-speech/">ThinkProgress's</a>):</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2011/06/01/rand_paul_jail_tea_parties/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Read this story at <a href="http://www.salon.com/2011/06/01/rand_paul_jail_tea_parties/">http://www.salon.com/2011/06/01/rand_paul_jail_tea_parties/</a></p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2011/06/01/rand_paul_jail_tea_parties/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2011/06/01/rand_paul_jail_tea_parties/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>56</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

