Skip to main content

The news media finally seem to have twigged to the major issue that will be decided on November 4th: do the Democrats get a filibuster-proof Senate?   As commented in the first post, there’s a lot more too it than that, but the Senate is as good a place to start as any.    
It’s a complex question, more complicated than just reaching 60 votes.  The Senate can divide along the lines of particular issues, it can divide into sub-blocs and cliques and in a lot of other ways, so 60 votes isn’t always 60 votes.  Contrawise, sometimes 57 votes is 60 votes, especially for GOP Senators from blue states, who may find themselves making up the difference sometimes in the face of elections in 2010.  Instead of figuring out some mythical exact number needed (59?  62?), let’s assume instead that the more Democratic votes and the more Progressive votes, the better.
So, what about November 5th in the Senate?

I mentioned three levels of post-election challenges in the last post. (1. Move society.  2. Move a legislative agenda.  3. Govern from a probably temporary position of power.) The filibuster issue in the Senate obviously impacts things the most down on level 3, power, but with the "payload" of allowing Democrats to better act up on level 2, actually enacting things like health care reform, voting reform and aiding the unions who aid us and so on.

Items on Harry Reid’s agenda, and thus on our agenda.  

  1. Get Joe Lieberman back on board.
  1. Get (Hypothetical) President-Elect Obama to take a GOPer from a blue state out of the Senate and put her (or him) into the Executive Branch.
  1. Get the public behind the need for the "New New Deal" everyone keeps babbling about.
  1. Other thoughts?  Post and let us know!  You just might have the key to a bit more Senatorial power in your head.

We’ll have to be brief here, but let’s go down the list.

Mr. Reid has something that Mr. Lieberman wants: Mr. Lieberman’s powerful chairmanship.  Ordinarily, a Democratic Majority Leader couldn’t unseat a powerful chairman... but ordinarily, powerful chairmen don’t go out and actively smear their own party’s presidential candidate on the campaign trail.  If Mr. Reid doesn’t feel like compromise, Mr. Lieberman has no moral call on the job at all.  He’s out, and he has not one to blame but himself.  Contrawise, Senator Lieberman still has one thing that Democrats value: his vote on procedural issues, but only his vote on procedural issues.  The DNC has no upside to promoting Senator Lieberman’s political career anymore, not after his behavior this year.  They don’t need his experience, they don’t need his vote for actual passage of bills (the 50 vote threshold is well below where Democrats will be on November 5th anyway).  For Senator Lieberman, the cupboard is bare if he wants to bargain... except for a very serious promise to toe the party line on procedural issues.  
Sounds like "Harry" and "Joe" can get together and sort this one out privately, and let’s encourage them to do it.  Maybe there are some emotional issues there, perhaps Senator Lieberman is still smarting from his primary season loss to another Democrat in 2006.  If so, he needs to tell himself that he got his revenge in Minneapolis-St. Paul and now he needs to hang on to his Chairmanship and power.
That’s +1 procedural vote in the Senate, over and above the November 4th totals.  

If (Hypothetical) President-Elect Obama is wise he has probably already been opening lines to some Senate Republicans he could make excellent use of in the Executive Branch regardless of the Senate count on November 4th.
First of all, a GOP Senator might decide that being in the minority long term wouldn’t be nearly as much fun as being the Ambassador to France or to the Court of Saint James or the United Nations.  There are a thousand jobs in which Mr. Obama could use a Republican Senator.
But what if they don’t feel like a cushy job?
Well then it’s time to consider Cabinet appointments.  A whole lot of Republican Senators would probably like to be Cabinet officials, especially with their wings suddenly trimmed in the Senate the last two years and for the foreseeable future (two whole years).  Worse, when they do the math and realize that the Obama Administration is easily going to reach 60 or so, they may decide it’s better to be the GOP Senator who subverts the Democrats from within than being the poor schmuck who sticks around the dome and watches as impotent GOP filibusters are ended again and again.
But what Republican Senators can offer another Democratic vote in exchange?  That is, which ones have Democratic Governors at home to appoint another Democrat to advance Mr. Obama’s agenda?  

Smiley face time...

The list is startlingly long, and I mean that literally.  I got startled.  Since typing the last paragraph, I did a quick cross reference of states with Democratic Governors and at least one Republican Senator.  
Here’s the list, and if you’re a Democrat, get ready to grin.

States with a Democratic Governor and a Republican Senator

States with a Democratic Governor and TWO Republican Senators
North Carolina

Count it up and that’s 19, yes, 19 different opportunities for (H) P-E Obama to add to his Senatorial numbers.  Nineteen!  What are the odds that at least a couple won’t be willing to buy their way into the winner’s circle?  
There are people of all political persuasions and all specialities of experience here.  Maine alone offers two mostly liberal, female Senators (Senator Snowe and Senator Collins, assuming that Senator Collins wins re-election Tuesday) both with a lot of experience in various areas in which they agree with Senator and (Hypothetical) President-Elect Obama.   Wyoming alone offers two staunchly conservative male Senators with Western viewpoints.  Arizona offers up Senator John McCain, should he choose to swallow his pride and take a job as Sec-Def or the like.   Would Senator Arlen Specter (White, Male, Jewish and middle of the road on many issues) really pass up an opportunity to really run part of the show for eight years?  
There are as many votes available here as Senaotr Obama chooses to collect.  I’m not nearly as smart as the (H) P-E but in his shoes I’d grab at least 2.
That’s +2 more procedural votes in the Senate.  

We’ll discuss moving the public in future posts, so let’s wrap this one up on Senate numbers.
60 votes for cloture isn’t magical, nor is it guaranteed by the presence of 60 Democrats and Independents in the caucus.  The real rule is: the more the better.  60 is just an approximation: better call it 60 "or so".
Most prognosticators are now showing about +7 for Democrats on Election Day, for example, see, a site which take statistics seriously.   +7 alone gets Democrats to 56, plus one for Senator Bernie Sanders, who is a better Democrat than us Democrats: 57.  Senator Lieberman agreeing that he can swallow his pride, keep his chair and vote Democratic on procedural matters is 58.  Senator Arlen Specter and Senator Olympia Snowe (or pick your own) in the Cabinet make 60.  
60 "or so" is there, if Senator Obama wants it and we stand up and fight for it.  


Caveats and disclaimers: this offer not valid in all 50 states.  Some GOP Senators on the list may lose their jobs anyway come November 4th and so the number may be less than 19 on November 5th.  Actual odds of winning nearing 100%, actual cash value determined by our dedication after the election.  Numerous other GOP figures should be in the Obama Administration as well as Senators from "Blue Governor States".  Long term exposure to GOP Senators may cause disorientation, loss of spinal calcium, nausea, vomiting or mental distress, consult your physician.  

Originally posted to Craignonumbers on Fri Oct 31, 2008 at 03:28 AM PDT.

Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags


More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  Inhofe would make a great ambassador to (5+ / 0-)

    Kiribati, or maybe the Maldives.

    What's so hard about Peace, Love, and Truth and Progress?

    by melvin on Fri Oct 31, 2008 at 03:33:48 AM PDT

  •  Wyoming and many other states (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    hideinplainsight, Justus

    governor has to appoint someone from the same aprty as the exiting senator.

    And after this election, Virginia and Oregon will not have Republican senators, nor North Carolina two Republicans.

    Arlen Specter will already vote with us on a lot of key issues, like EFCA.

    -5.38, -5.90 Deus mihi iustitiam dabit.

    by cjallen on Fri Oct 31, 2008 at 03:36:14 AM PDT

  •  McCain as SecDef?!? (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    hideinplainsight, Teknocore  Maybe Homeland Security or something.  Not Secretary of Defense.

    McCain/Palin = Drama Queen/Pageant Queen

    by gorebeatbush2 on Fri Oct 31, 2008 at 03:37:27 AM PDT

  •  This could be a very unpopular move (3+ / 0-)

    Some of those Democratic governors will have their eyes on those Senate seats, and won't be happy appointing a Dem incumbent rather than taking out the Republican themselves in 2010.

    You forgot New Hampshire: after November, Dem Gov and 1 GOP Senator.

  •  #1 is a non starter; Joe must go! (0+ / 0-)

    There is no frakking way anyone can ever trust this Kosher Klown again.
    Let him take the place he earned, low seniority independent, where he should have been in the first place.

    St. Ronnie was an asshole.

    by manwithnoname on Fri Oct 31, 2008 at 04:24:01 AM PDT

  •  This is interesting... (0+ / 0-)

    I don't entirely agree with everything here (such as trying to pack the Senate by pulling some moderate Republican Senators into either the administration or putting them in cushy jobs like Ambassadorships), but I think it's worthwhile for folks to read this.  I think Senate packing would be blatant and hubristic.  Granted, I also disagree slightly with Kos on the need to utterly destroy the Republican party, so I may well be in a minority here.

    If liberty means anything at all, it means the right to tell people what they do not want to hear. -- George Orwell

    by nilocjin on Fri Oct 31, 2008 at 04:38:06 AM PDT

  •  When I saw this diary (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Elwood Dowd

    I thought you were going to write about a possible Georgia runoff - this may indeed be the final outcome - where we literally have to win a senate race after nov. 4 to get to 60.

    But interesting stuff nonetheless!

  •  Republican Senators (0+ / 0-)

    I can think of a few republican senators who may not mind leaving the Senate.  

    Arlen Specter for example.  He's up for re-election in 2 years and will likely be targeted by both Dems and Republicans.  Plus he's up there in age. Would he take a cushy job over having to deal with all that again?

    George Voinoich.  He's got to see the way political winds in Ohio are blowing and he's got to know that in 2 years when he's up for re-election that his time might be up.  Stick around for 2 years in the minority and then run a bloody re-election race which he might lose or take a position and be there for 4-8 years?

    As for Arizona, Napolitano is a good candidate to run against McCain in 2010 for senator.  It just might force him into early retirement and clear the path for her.  In Kansas, Brownback is already retiring so Sebilius has an open path should she choose it.  Roberts and Kyl are both possibilities for replacing in the Senate and for some position but frankly they're both odious and I'd rather have them in the permanent minority in the Senate.  I guess Obama could appoint Kyl and/or Roberts to some ambassadorship or some minor post if the so chose it then have the governors appoint a Dem or themselves and we'd not only pick up those seats but also have McCain and Brownbacks seats to win in 2 years but I doubt that would ever happen.

    Chuck Grassley isn't going anywhere.  He's an institution in the Senate for Iowa and will likely die there.

    Oregon and Virginia will no longer have republican Senators come November 4.

    Burr in North Carolina will be taken out in 2 years anyway and like Voinovich and Specter may see the political winds and accept a spot thus opening a seat for a Dem to go into and have 2 years of incumbency.  

    Corker and Alexander?  One is a one term loser and the other will die in office if he so chooses to.  I doubt Alexander would take a position when he can stay in the Senate as long as he wants.  Corker might be a good possibility but for what?

    Snowe and Collins?  If this election has shown us anything it's that the two ladies from Maine will never be voted out.  Why would they leave what is essentially a lifetime job?  They may also be more valuable in teh Senate as so called moderates.  

    Same with Oklahoma.  Why would the Republicans there leave what will likely be their seats until they choose to leave?

    Wyoming has to replace with someone from the same party.  I'm not sure about the others.

    This is your world These are your people You can live for yourself today Or help build tomorrow for everyone -8.75, -8.00

    by DisNoir36 on Fri Oct 31, 2008 at 04:53:21 AM PDT

  •  How about flipping a Senator or 2? (0+ / 0-)

    It is not a stretch for 1 or more Senators to flip.  Has happened in the past.  How about Hagel?  There may be a few who realize that the Republican brand is in the dumper and would want to be in the party with power and a future.

    "We have a blind date with Destiny and it looks like she's ordered the lobster." - The Shoveler

    by Angelo Mysterioso on Fri Oct 31, 2008 at 05:37:34 AM PDT

  •  Nice idea, but don't trust Specter. (0+ / 0-)

    He is, after all, the same guy who gave us the crazy, direction-changing-three-times, final bullet theory about the JFK assassination.

    It's not enough for us to be right. We have to be right and we have to win.

    by RickinDallas on Fri Oct 31, 2008 at 05:58:48 AM PDT

  •  Charles Grassley of Iowa (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    Consider how many of these GOP Senator are either considering retirement in two years anyway or facing changing demographics back home that make a re-election bid more difficult.

    Republicans will need to defend 19 seats in 2010.  Dems only 15.  The list of Republicans has perhaps 10 or 11 that would have been considered vulnerable and viable pick-up opportunities if they were up THIS cycle.  Dems probably only 5 (and that's because the replacements for Obama and Biden will be freshmen).

    With an ideological war brewing, how many senior aging moderate republicans want to muck around in the Senate for a couple of years until retirement when someone is dangling Executive Branch power before them?

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site