Skip to main content

View Diary: The bit of reality behind the Myth of 60 (202 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  adding one seat will give us +3 on some (0+ / 0-)

    committees.  It is a good point on "what happens to 8.97 seats" -- it's hard to know where they will round things.

    Looking at the history of the Senate, I can't remember which one, but one of the early Clinton-year congresses was 58/42 in the Senate.

    I would guess that we will end up with committee ratios at or very close to that 58/42 congress, taking into account that some committees have grown slightly since then.

    When we were in the minority, we bargained for seats the same way.  It happens.  Nobody likes to lose.  

    Just because Reid isn't "turning the screws" yet doesn't make him a bad guy.

    •  The 103rd was 57/43, briefly. (0+ / 0-)
      •  that's the one I was thinking of. (0+ / 0-)

        And I imagine that will be the basis for the ratio negotiations.

        •  I'm sure that'll be the Dem starting point. (0+ / 0-)

          But that won't make it the Republican one.

          They have as leverage our need to get the committees in place to handle cabinet and other nominations, plus a pressing legislative schedule.

          I'm sure they had that in the 103rd, too. But then again, they didn't have quite the same lineup of Republican dicks.

          Here were the results of 1993's organization:

          Ag: D+2
          Approps: D+3
          Armed Svcs: D+1
          Banking: D+3
          Budget: D+3
          Commerce: D+1
          Energy: D+1
          Enviro: D+3
          Finance: D+2
          For. Rel: D+2
          Gov. Affairs: D+3
          Judiciary: D+2
          Labor: D+3
          Rules: D+2
          Sm. Business: D+2
          Veterans: D+2
          Indian Aff: D+2 (with R co-chair)
          Intel: D+1 (with R co-chair)

          •  it's interesting how it shook out in 1993. (0+ / 0-)

            I would expect something similiar this go-round.

            And I would not give to much credence to McConnell's very obviously empty threats.  He's going to coral Collins, Snowe, Specter, Graham & Coleman to filibuster an organizing vote on Day 1?


            Other than Roll Call reporting on this stupidity, it's a myth.  It won't happen.

            Looks to me like the D+3 committees are the ones that were expanded in 1993, is that correct?

            •  I don't know how empty it is. (0+ / 0-)

              He might not ever have to get to a filibuster. McConnell's refusal to work seriously on committee agreements to this point has already set important work back behind schedule. The longer he holds out, the more desperate for a deal Democrats become. If January 6th rolls around and there are still no agreements on ratios, much less actual names and assignments, he will have accomplished much of his purpose. And holding out just a little bit more doesn't even require the cooperation of Collins, Snowe, Specter or any of the others.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

  • Recommended (127)
  • Community (60)
  • 2016 (47)
  • Elections (43)
  • Environment (37)
  • Climate Change (32)
  • Bernie Sanders (32)
  • Hillary Clinton (30)
  • Republicans (29)
  • Education (28)
  • Civil Rights (28)
  • Media (28)
  • Culture (27)
  • Law (25)
  • Science (25)
  • Congress (24)
  • Barack Obama (23)
  • Labor (20)
  • Economy (19)
  • Trans-Pacific Partnership (18)
  • Click here for the mobile view of the site