The Curse of 60?
It's quite correct that there's nothing actually magical about Democrats have 60 senators. It does not mean they will shatter every filibuster or succeed in all their priorities. It does not mean they can pass pass single-payer health reform or cap carbon emissions at a quiet belch. But I think Terry Samuel goes rather too far in dampening expectations here:
For Democrats, the 60 votes will be a curse as often as it is a blessing. While it gives them enormous flexibility to move important legislation, it also turns every Democratic senator into a kingmaker or a deal-breaker, and that is a recipe for chaos. The first rule of politics is that you must use what you have to get what you want. And so the personal wish list of every liberal senator will likely grow alongside the White House's ambitions, as Democrats may see the filibuster-proof majority as a discreet and urgent opportunity to move on everything from health care to immigration.
But that's not some new state of affairs. The situation was quite similar when there were 59 Democrats and the wish lists that mattered were the 56th, 57th, 58th, and 59th most conservative members of the party and the first, second, and third most liberal Republican senators. Having one extra vote will be a blessing far more often than it will be a curse. But hitting that magic number 60 will still be a heavy lift.
The dynamic that interests me, however, is what happens to that 56th, 57th, 58th, 59th and 60th most conservative Senate Democrats. Because the thing about 60 votes is that it doesn't leave you anywhere to hide. When Ben Nelson partnered with Arlen Specter and Olympia Snowe and Susan Collins to hold up the stimulus bill, the argument was that only Ben Nelson's unstoppable negotiating technique could secure those crucial votes. That argument is no longer operative. Conservative Democrats can't cloak their objections and preferences in the need to bring Republicans on-board to avoid a filibuster. A filibuster would require one of them to vote against cloture. And that's a hard vote to cast.
Photo credit: Mark Wilson/Getty Images.
By
Ezra Klein
|
July 6, 2009; 6:50 PM ET
Save & Share:
Previous: Bill Kristol Should Name Some Names
Next: Becoming Cheaper by Becoming Healthier
Posted by: LindaB1 | July 6, 2009 9:22 PM | Report abuse
Anything in the world which makes life hard for shallow, pompous senators like Ben Nelson - it is an advancement for humanity.
Ezra you will be lucky to see any change in the un-democratic structure of Senate in your lifetime. You and me are going to die seeing this un-democratic Senate ruining our life. Only question is whether we die fighting this silly senate structure (which gives rise to moronic Ben Nelsons of the world); or we do nothing.
Obviously to do something is to keep on pointing out what is wrong with the Senate. And to rejoice when it makes tough for bad players!
Now is the time to rejoice before we resume our eternal struggle.
Posted by: umesh409 | July 7, 2009 1:35 AM | Report abuse
The comments to this entry are closed.
I have been holding on to the idea that no Democrat in the Senate would dare to filibuster the final health reform bill. Holding on hard....because if health reform only needs a "majority" not a "supermajority" to pass, some Dems could vote no and it would still pass, right? Then, would they vote to filibuster? Hard to imagine/ Easy to imagine someone like Rahm Emmanuel calling them up and telling them what their political future looks like...not pretty. So I remain very optimistic.