Is the Senate now the world's most awful deliberative body?

“I don’t know that you’d find any legislative body in America — or the world — that’s as dysfunctional.” 

Jay Dardenne, the Republican lieutenant governor of Louisiana, who decided

 not to run for Senate against Sen. Mary Landrieu,a Democrat

 considered among the most vulnerable in the nation.

So, I guess that means we’re No. 1. We have the most awful, incompetent national legislature on the planet. Which, int turn, means nobody wants to join.

In Michigan, Carl Levin’s seat is opening up for the first time in four decades. Yet, Congressman Gary Peters seems to have the Democratic nomination in the 2014 contest all to his own. Then we have the Republicans …

We have a GOP governor, attorney general, secretary of state, Supreme Court and a state House and Senate dominated by the Republican Party. Yet, so far, the GOP doesn’t seem to be even close to having a solid candidate emerge for Levin’s seat.

What’s going on here? Nothing unusual. The same phenomenon is occurring all over the nation. As the New York Time recently reported, “rarely has the thought of serving in the Senate seemed so unappealing.”

Senate retirements are at record levels. Since the 2010 elections, a total of 30 senators have bowed out. More exits could be coming.

Once known as “world’s greatest deliberative body,” the Senate is now paralyzed by hyper-partisanship and outrageous abuses of the filibuster rules. As a result, eight of the 33 senators whose terms expire in 2014 have decided not to run again. Those include lawmakers viewed as 2014 shoo-ins such as Levin and fellow Democratic senators Tom Harkin of Iowa and Max Baucus of Montana, chairman of the powerful Finance Committee.

“In the old days, you’d have to carry the Senate Finance chair out on a stretcher,” joked Ed Rollins, longtime GOP consultant, in an interview with Jeremy Peters of the Times.

Here’s a portion of Peters’ piece:

“… Potential candidates from Georgia to Kentucky, Iowa to Montana are loudly saying, ‘Thanks, but no thanks’ (to a Senate run).

“Add to that the cost of getting there — which can include fighting off special interests and “super PACs” from your own party, exhausting criticism from the increasingly partisan news media, and prohibitive campaign expenses — and a Senate seat no longer seems so grand.”

The election of 2014 presents a great opportunity for Republicans as 20 Democratic-held seats are up, and many of those seats are in states where President Obama lost in 201,  including North Carolina, Montana, Arkansas and Alaska.

Yet, Republicans still have no viable declared candidates in any of those Red States. Even loose-cannon candidates who love the spotlight but are probably too controversial to win a statewide race, such as the controversial Congressman Steve King of Iowa, have declined to pursue their state’s GOP nomination.

In his weekly column for the Mount Pleasant Morning Sun, GOP activist Dennis Lennox expressed concern about the lack of party candidates for Senate – and the seeming lack of concern among fellow activists about Peters’ head start in the ’14 race.

Here’s a portion of what Lennox wrote:

“… Congressmen Mike Rogers of Livingston County and Justin Amash of Kent County …bring a lot to the race, but both have considerations that could keep them out.

“Rogers has a plum position as chairman of the all-powerful House Intelligence Committee that gives him a lot of national prestige. (He’s also emerging as a potential new FBI chief.) Amash, on the other hand, is a leading Ron Paul disciple who would have to give up his role as the House helpmate to Kentucky Sen. Rand Paul, heir apparent to his father’s libertarian dynasty, in order to run against Peters.

“… Besides not having a candidate, Republicans are worried about a contested primary dividing the party and forcing precious cash to be spent on what amounts to a political scrimmage.

“If Republicans are serious about winning then the time is now for Schostak to exercise his prerogatives as chairman by drafting the most viable candidate and, if necessary, changing the rules to prevent a repeat of the three-ring circus that was the 2012 senatorial campaign.”