A number of folks have been having an ongoing conversation with Matt Stoller over the propriety of the Democrats and the Netroots, in particular, shooting for 60 seats in the United States Senate this cycle (a conversation that was sparked most recently by MyDD's Road to 60 ActBlue page).
Stoller has written, for instance, that "we don't need 60 votes to move progressive priorities," but rather that "we need ... a committed group of Senators - perhaps as small as 25 or 30 - without whom the other clumps can't get anything done." He also points to Tom Coburn shutting down bills and Russ Feingold, who has sparked debates on issues like censure, as examples of what even a single Senator can accomplish.
In a minority situation, or even a majority when there is a President willing to veto anything and everything that doesn't adhere to his far right view of the world, individual and group obstruction is likely the best way to achieve the progressive agenda. In such cases, stopping a further rightward lurch can be preferable to enabling the other side to move forward with outright regressive legislation.
But the 111th Congress won't necessarily be such a situation. Certainly, I'm holding out hope that it will not, and rather that it would be a Congress in which progressives hope to move, rather than block, legislation. If Barack Obama is able to win the presidency, there is going to be a lot of legislative legwork to be done -- and it's not going to be easy, and it might not all get done. Sixty votes are going to need to be scrapped together on a whole host of issues: Passing a universal healthcare program, passing an energy reform bill, passing legislation that would put in place an end to the Iraq War, confirming true progressives to the Supreme Court... you name it. With the Republicans already topping the all-time record for filibusters by nearly 50 percent this Congress -- a Congress in which they didn't even really need to use the tactic in order to thwart the Democratic agenda given George W. Bush's veto stamp -- there is little question in my mind that the Republicans would make use of the tactic at least as often, if not more often, were it in their power to do so (and it was their only and last resort for obstruction) during a 111th Congress in which Democrats controlled the House, the Senate and the Presidency.
Would having 60 seats in the Senate inoculate the Democrats from obstruction? Not on all measures, no. Would it ensure that the entire platform of progressive legislative proposals would be enacted into law? Again, no. Why? Not every member of the Democratic caucus votes lockstep with the leadership, nor would they be expected to. However, just as a Jeff Merkley would be more likely to vote with the Democrats on the key measures than Gordon Smith, or Tom Udall than Steve Pearce, or Mark Warner than Jim Gilmore, so too would someone like Ronnie Musgrove be more likely to vote with the Democrats than Roger Wicker. There very little question in my mind that this is true. And the more likelies you string together, the greater the likelihood you have that important bills get through the Senate.
It's possible that the Democrats aren't quite able to reach 60 this time, that instead they hit somewhere in the mid- to high-50s in the Senate. At present Warner and Tom Udall seem like close-to-sure things in Virginia and New Mexico; Jeanne Shaheen and Mark Udall seem more likely than not in New Hampshire and Colorado; Musgrove and Mark Begich are both in statistical dead-heats in Mississippi and Alaska. Wins in just these states (not even counting the real possibilities in Oregon, Minnesota, Maine, North Carolina, Kansas, Kentucky, Nebraska and Texas) would bring the Democrats to 57 seats.
If it is the case that the Democrats have somewhere in the neighborhood of 57 votes in the Senate, all of the sudden it becomes much more difficult for the Republicans to obstruct -- not impossible, but more difficult. All of the sudden, people like George Voinovich of Ohio and Arlen Specter of Pennsylvania -- both of whom have tendencies to defect on votes from time to time, both of whom are up for reelection in 2010 when, if they choose to run again, will fact tough challenges -- as well as Olympia Snowe of Maine (who isn't up in 2010 but nevertheless is willing at times to vote with the Democrats) come on board and the 60-vote threshold is met. Can't keep Joe Lieberman on a particular issue, or Musgrove or someone else? Then twist the arm of Mel Martinez, who will have to face the very evenly divided electorate in Florida in 2010; or Judd Gregg, who is up for reelection in New Hampshire; or even Kit Bond of Missouri or Chuck Grassley of Iowa, or any of the other Republican Senators up for reelection that fall. As you can see, overcoming the 60-vote threshold is a whole lot less arduous with 57 votes than it is with 51 today (which now includes Lieberman).
On a policy level, that's why I'm supporting the Road to 60 effort, and why I've put my money where my mouth is by contributing to the effort. Do I think that having 60 votes in the Senate would be a panacea? Of course not. It's going to be hard work to get a progressive agenda passed in the 111th Congress -- with 51 votes, with 55 votes, with 57 votes or even with 60 votes. But it would be easier with 60 Democratic Senators than it would with appreciably fewer. That's why, even leaving aside the political level (which I've written about before and no doubt will again) it is so important to me to shoot for 60 Democratic Senators this time.
If you agree with me -- or even if you just like the type of candidate that Musgrove or Begich or Kay Hagan or Rick Noriega or Jim Slattery is, or you like what they stand for (like winning a Senate election in Kansas for the first time since 1932, taking back Trent Lott's Senate seat, defeating the longest serving Republican Senator in history, knocking off Liddy Dole or laying down the marker that Texas is no longer a purely red state) -- please make a contribution today. It is extremely important for contributions to come in before the end of the filing period Monday night. So make your voice heard now by heading over to Act Blue.
|
|
|
Permalink :: 15 Comments :: Post a Comment
|
In order to post a comment, you must be logged in. If you have a member account, please log in to comment.
If not, you can make an account right here. It's quick and free.
