Obsidian Wings links to the Senate Organizing Resolutions [hereand here.] These resolutions guarantee Democratic control over the agenda, chairmanships and committee assignments throughout the entire two year session no matter what. The 2001 agreement is the procedural aberattion. Indeed, Joe Lieberman could flip to the GOP, as well as Ted Kennedy, Barbara Boxer and Diane Feinstein could also defect to the GOP and Harry Reid would still be the majority leader. Joe Lieberman's sole point of leverage against the Democratic caucus has already passed. It passed the moment that the Senate was organized under these rules.
We know that Lieberman will vote against any anti-escalation, anti-unitary executive language that the Senate debates or attempts to pass. We knew that a year ago, we knew that two years ago, we knew that last month, we know that today, and we'll know that a year from now. Therefore he is a constant, and thus analytically irrelevant. To get anything done regarding Iraq, Reid and the Senate Democrats always knew that they would need an additional Republican defector to compensate for Lieberamn's vote.
Since Lieberman can not flip the Senate and his voting pattern will not change no matter what inducement, punishment or positive incentive is offered to him, the Senate Democrats and more importantly Sen. Reid should ignore him and push forward with a serious attempt to rein in President Bush's freedom of action in Iraq.
Placating Lieberman out of a fear of losing control of the Senate is not a valid reason of not addressing Iraq and our incoherent and ineffective foreign policy. Substance matters, and even if the best that Reid can do is lose cloture votes 58 to 42 or 53 to 47, this catches the political process up with the public process, and should produce beneficial policy and political results in 2008.
Here's a longer history, containing an account of the 83rd Congress, which must hold the all time record for shifting majorities:
"The Republicans had a Senate plurality from January to July 1953. Then the Democrats had a plurality until June 1954; the Republicans again until December 1954; and finally the Democrats again until the 83d Congress ended in January 1955. These periods were occasionally interrupted by a week or two, and in one case a month, when the parties were tied.
For nearly half of the 83d Congress, the Democrats had more Senate seats than the Republicans. But for the entire two years, Republicans chaired the committees and ran the Senate. Republican Senator William Knowland frequently referred to himself as a majority leader without a majority, and his Democratic counterpart, Lyndon Johnson, said, "If anyone has more problems than a majority leader with a minority, it is a minority leader with a majority.""
It also contains an account of Sen. Wayne Morse's difficulties finding a stable party identity after he left the Republicans:
"When the Senate met at the start of the 83d Congress, Morse refused to sit with either party in the Senate chamber and instead sat on a folding chair in the aisle between the Republican side and the Democratic side. When he realized this made him look silly, he resumed his seat on the Republican side even though he was no longer a Republican. Then he wanted to sit among the Democrats because, he said, two Republican senators kept whispering insults at him."
I went and checked the Senate's Organizing Resolutions, and it's true: whereas the 107th Congress's resolution (S. Res. 8) does provide for a shift in control of the Senate if the majority shifts, there is no such language in the organizing resolutions for the present Congress (S. Res. 27 and 28.)
Which means that I feel no compunction whatsoever about saying:
Joe Lieberman: go jump in a lake. The Republicans can have you.
MLN is powered by