Share

No More Senate Super Majority Illusion

by: Stephen Crockett, t r u t h o u t | Op-Ed

photo
(Photo: M Kuhn; Edited: Jared Rodriguez / t r u t h o u t)

There is very little upside to the election of a Republican far right senator to replace the late Sen. Ted Kennedy (D-Massachusetts) for Democrats, progressives and reformers. My list is very short: (1) everyone should now understand that we never had a real workable Senate Super Majority to begin with despite all the media hype, (2) watering down progressive legislation has now been shown to produce electoral defeat for Democrats and (3) Democratic candidates at all levels can now clearly see that they will suffer if Democratic House and Senate members do not start acting more aggressively in opposition to Republican actions and spin.

The Senate Democrats should never let Sen. Joe Lieberman (I-Connecticut) caucus with them. Lieberman was rejected by Connecticut Democrats at the polls. He was not elected as a Democrat. He often opposes the Democratic legislative agenda in the Senate. Lieberman supports and campaigns for Republicans. Letting Lieberman join the Democratic caucus raised unrealistic expectations without adding his vote behind the legislation Democrats were trying to pass! For Democrats, the fictional 60th Senate Democratic member illusion was a "lose, lose" proposition.

Of course, some elected Democratic senators remain unreliable votes. Neither Sen. Ben Nelson (D-Nebraska) nor Sen. Blanche Lincoln (D-Arkansas) are guaranteed yes votes on most progressive legislative issues. It is obvious that relying on a 60-member Super Majority to pass legislation is and always will be a mistake. A simple majority vote of Senate members can reduce the number of senators it takes to end a filibuster. I suggest moving to 55 instead of the current 60, as a reasonable compromise, unless Senate Republicans stop threatening to filibuster everything Democrats want to do in terms of passing laws and budgets. Ending filibusters entirely would be a better approach.

Watering down health care reform left the Democratic base discouraged for basically nothing in return. Republicans remain devoted to defeating all real health care reforms. Corporate Democrats filled the Senate version full of compromises that left independents unhappy with the results. If we had no filibuster threat, the Senate could have given us a much better product to sell to the voting public.

Republicans can be counted on to do everything possible to disrupt debate and progress on legislation in the Senate. It pays for them. It helped defeat great Democratic candidates in state and local elections in Pennsylvania, New Jersey and Virginia in 2009. With the election of Scott Brown to the Senate in January 2010, the Republicans smell blood. Their shark instincts are in full attack mode.

Republican tactics and spin make bipartisan compromise basically impossible! It is time to tell the public to forget it and why!

Democrats should never have let the idea that "Obama and the Democrats own the economy" to gain traction. Anyone with even a little bit of honest understanding of how an economy operates should have been responding to every statement along this line. Our message should have been that the Republican economic train-wreck started about 30 years ago and would take at least two full presidential terms to fix. This answer is good politics and actually true. Obama should have been publicly attacking Republican efforts to undermine his agenda as attacks on the American middle class designed to benefit greedy corporations. It would have been good politics and is true! There is still time to correct our messaging.

Every local Democratic officeholder and/or candidate in America needs to put pressure on Senate Democrats to move aggressively to pass legislation with a real economic populist approach. Local Democrats should demand an end to the filibuster blackmail. It is time to move to regulate and tax imported manufactured goods. Bring our factory jobs back home. Pass the Employee Free Choice Act without watering it down. Raise taxes on the wealthy. Pass a second stimulus bill. Regulate abuses on Wall Street, including executive pay at publicly traded corporations.

Make economic populism the core principle behind our Democratic Party. Show we are not the "Republican-lite" alternative. Be aggressive, forceful and brave. Be winners! Be real Democrats!
 

Creative Commons License
This work by Truthout is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial 3.0 United States License.

Support Truthout's work with a $10/month tax-deductible donation today!
  

»


Stephen Crockett is the host of Democratic Talk Radio <http://www.DemocraticTalkRadio.com> and editor of Mid-Atlantic Labor.com <http://www.mid-atlanticlabor.com>. Mail him at 698 Old Baltimore Pike, Newark, Delaware 19702. Phone: 443-907-2367. Email: demlabor@aol.com.

Comments

This forum is moderated by software. Please allow up to 15 minutes for your comments to go live and avoid posting the same comment multiple times.

The idea by the Democratic

The idea by the Democratic leadership that you need 60-votes to pass legislation is mind boggling. This mentality usually causes lousy, waterdowned legislation to be passed. Just like the Carter and Clinton years, the democratic Congress has squandered the opportunity to pass meaningful legislation thinking a simple majority won't do. When "W" was in office, the Republicans, with a simple majority, rammed legislation down the throats of the American people. The Democrats need to let the Republicans filibuster and block whatever legislation they don't agree with and then let them explain their position to the people during the next election cycle.

The weak kneed, go-along

The weak kneed, go-along Congressional Democrats were a disgrace during the Bush tears. Nothing new. What is new is Obama, whose bipartisan bystander stance, contempt for progressives, and corporate deal making have brought us to this point. He's a hollow man. Hope for nothing but window dressing that will be removed when Republicans are again a majority.

Crockett writes as if the

Crockett writes as if the Democrats are going to save us. There's a hoot.

The executive mansion is full of corporate ho's, the DLC types.

The Senate confirmed, with many Democrats voting in support, of Alito and Roberts, and look at what we received from those conservative judicial activists this past week?

Pelousi took impeachment off the table.

Obama adopted as his own policy after Bush policy.

I don't think we need look for any heroes in the Democratic party, the party of the DLC and bait and switch...

The right to Filibuster is

The right to Filibuster is not in the US Constitution. It is just a rule, that the Senate can change with a majority vote. The problem is that the Dems really don't want to change anything, lest it upset their corporate sponsors. One way they kill their own bills is by lumping in all ideas into one bill, like Medicare cuts and taxes on wealthy insurance plans.

Carlton speaks truth! The

Carlton speaks truth! The Democrats can no more vote against the corporations than can the Republicans. Unless of course we let them know on no uncertain terms that we won't reelect them unless they do.

So come on people! Speak up! Communicate this to your Congressman and Senators.

There was never a

There was never a super-majority. So long as there remains Democrats, who, for their own greed and political expediency, vote with the sick Republicans, and can be bought out on a daily basis through the threats and bribes of lobbyists, then there will always be the this block of conservative- prostitute-Democrats (along with the full time prostitutes: big business Republicans) who will sabotage what we need so desperately and immediately in this country: publicly funded elections, single payer health care, two or three impeachments on today's Supreme Court for candidates, namely Roberts and Scalia, lying under oath.

Maybe now tort reform will

Maybe now tort reform will be included in a health bill, a very good thing as a result of the election.

Start over. Enact Medicare

Start over.
Enact Medicare for all by a majority vote.
Finish what FDR and LBJ started.

Please.

Reid is a panty waste. So

Reid is a panty waste. So is Pelosi to a great extent. If, after Bush's eight years, and six of Rethug control during that time, Dems thought they could actually have bi-partisanship, it shows how they were not ready to take control of things. Frist never had 60 votes. He used reconciliation to give Bush the bills he wanted. Right wing media never said a thing. Reid could do this, get the health care bill passed, and the right-wing will go crazy. So what? All he has to do is get on the Senate floor and say he's going to do what Bill Frist did all the time, and tell the Rethugs to go to hell!

The bush regime never had a

The bush regime never had a super majority, and they did exactly what they wanted damn the people.

It is inaccurate to say

It is inaccurate to say Democrats can change the filibuster rules from 60 to a lower number. It takes a 2/3rd vote (66 or 67) to make that change. Take out Joe Lieberman, and Democrats have only 58 votes. See below.

Filibusters a Great American Tradition

U.S. Congress, U.S. Politics, Governance, U.S. Judiciary, Politics

Sarah A. Binder, Senior Fellow, Governance Studies
Steven S. Smith, Professor

The Atlanta Journal-Constitution

May 25, 2003 β€”

Rule change unlikely

....One rule about Senate rules is that they are difficult to change. Ending a filibuster on a resolution to change the rules requires a two-thirds majority....

To: 15:42 There are

To: 15:42 There are SENATORIAL and CONGRESSIONAL maneuvers Obama can use to force his agenda, which is EXACTLY what he should be doing. By FORCE, Bush drove this country right, severely, retarded-ly to the right. Obama could begin using SIGNING STATEMENTS to rectify the perversion enacted by Bush. But Obama is not a progressive, and there's the rub, there's the real reason he will not ever become a left wing version of Bush. The truth is plain and simple to behold: Obama is a RIGHT WING DEMOCRAT, which is a nice way of saying he's a conservative Republican. The proof is in the pudding: four wars, cuts in Medicare, bailouts to corporations that should have been buried in the ground due to criminal behaviors. no action on DOMA. It goes on an on. The only people who endorsed Obama originally and who continue to stand behind him are religious-like true believers in the Democratic Party AND Republicans who like his conservative, neo-liberal style of ruling. So many Democrats just swallowed the "hope" and "change" mottos even though Obama NEVER STATED in his campaign what they meant. He deliberately chose to disguise these words as empty symbols. OBAMA ought to fail in 2012 for the dragging of this country even further to the right. Even electing Republicans in 12 will be better than having clever Obama continue his torture policies, disgraceful attitude to global temperature increase, etc.... It's always better to know where the knife is coming.... The Republicans at least let you know what they intend to do. This Obama stuff must end. The problem: Obama is a devoted and ardent admirer of Milton Friedman. Obama has a lot of buddies teaching this neoliberal crap to new hoards of conscienceless academics.

They don't need 60 votes to

They don't need 60 votes to change rules. If 51 senators sign a rule change, that is a majority, so Reid can announce the rule is changed. Who will stop him? The Sergeant of Arms is a Democrat. The Republicans can scream, but they have no army or police force. This is called majority rule.

To pretend that a senate from decades ago can prevent today's majority from acting is absurd. Can a senate pass a law that requires a vote of 95 senators to change it. Of course not, so why do people accept this 60 BS.