40 > 59: Only in the Democratic Senate

Since when is 59 not a majority of 100?

Since Democrats took over the U.S. Senate in 2007, as Steve Benen explains.

But there's another detail that the Post article didn't mention, and which is summarily ignored by the political establishment: we're dealing with a procedural dynamic that has never existed in American history. There's never been a time in U.S. history in which a Senate minority caucus could simply stop the majority from bringing all bills and/or mildly controversial nominees to the floor for a vote.

... the piece makes the current dynamic -- every vote gets a filibuster, and it's up to an easily-divided Democratic caucus to overcome this hurdle -- seem customary and normal, as this is just the way the American government has always operated.

It's not. Without a hint of debate, the rules have changed, and mandatory supermajorities on everything have become routine. Matt Yglesias recently noted, "This is a very new 'tradition' in American governance, it goes against everyone's common understanding of how democratic procedures are supposed to work, and there's very little reason to believe that the results will be beneficial in the long run."

Quickly and quietly, the political establishment came to accept that 60-vote minimums on everything of significance are customary. It's become something everyone simply "knows," despite the fact that this is a fairly radical departure from American norms.

If the nation is comfortable with this dramatic departure from the way the system was designed to function, fine. But let's not pretend this is normal.

No, it's not remotely close to "fine" and it never will be. Even if a majority of the country were in favor of changing the rules of math to make 40 greater than 59, it still would not be "fine," because not even a majority can eliminate majority rule.

The number of votes required to approve anything - bills, amendments, procedures, resolutions, bathroom breaks - in the 100-member U.S. Senate is 51. That's because - if there are any innumerate Democratic Senators reading this - 51 is 50 percent of 100 plus one. That's the definition of a majority.

And the repugs know it. That's why 49 Democratic Senators couldn't stop the repug Senate from wreaking havoc from 2003 to 2007: because repugs know that a majority is 51, and any party with fewer than 51 votes has to sit the fuck down and shut the fuck up.

Yet even after all those years of being ignored and shut out of all decision-making because they had "only" 49 votes, today's 60-member Democratic majority is still letting the repugs - the 40-member repugs - dictate what happens and obstruct everything.

Writing specifically about the ludicrousness of Senate dems seeking repug votes for healthcare reform, Anonymous Liberal addresses this difference in party dynamics.

If you doubt any of this, you really haven't been paying any attention to politics over the last decade. Anyone who claims that the parties are mirror images of each other is a fool or liar. Republicans and Democrats just don't approach politics in the same way.

Conditions will never be more favorable for the Democrats than they are right now. And yet there is a real chance that they will fail to pass their signature policy. And this is because a number of Democrats in the Senate are reluctant to even step up to the plate to end a Republican filibuster--on a key Democratic initiative with widespread popular support and an electoral mandate behind it. I wonder if Republicans realize how lucky they are. I doubt that any majority party in history has ever made it easier for the opposition party to stay relevant.

I used to accuse the Democrats of bringing knives to the repug gun fight. That's not what they're doing anymore. Now, Democrats are bringing guns to the fight - then handing them over to the repugs and baring their own chests for killing shots.

Cross-posted at They Gave Us A Republic ....