The faulty math of the Senate

[MadHound]

Well, it's happened, the Democrats got their sixty votes needed for cloture. They got their over the top majority and now debate can move forward.

The trouble is that the myth of sixty votes isn't true, and that's how we've gotten screwed.

As soon as the Democrats hit the Congress this year, pundits and news outlets started passing around the myth that Dems needed sixty votes to pass anything major, the stimulus bill, health care reform, climate change legislation, anything remotely controversial. Whereas 'Pugs were able to ramrod shit down out throats with a bare one or two vote edge, somehow, suddenly the Dems were supposed to have sixty votes or more.

This is utter bullshit, and it is hurting our country badly.

You need sixty votes for cloture, to stop a filibuster. You don't need sixty votes to pass a bill through the Senate, just your normal fifty one.

A filibuster is a tactic that is rarely used. Dems kept their powder dry all during the Bush administration and didn't filibuster a bill. In fact in my lifetime I can count using both hands the number of times there was a filibuster on a major issue, and still have fingers left over.

Filibusters are rare, a nuclear option that is hardly ever used, for good reason. They're just as likely to backfire on those who filibuster as they are to kill a bill, perhaps more so. A filibuster gives those who oppose a filibuster the chance to paint that party as obstructionists, as sticks in the mud, etc. etc. It leaves this political blind side open to anybody who wants to charge in and exploit it.

Yet somehow, over the past fifteen years, Democrats have gotten the idea that a Republican filibuster is something to avoid at all costs, that somehow they can't fight this tactic, that it is somehow the ultimate bill killer. Of course it isn't, especially with health care, but sadly the Democrats lack the spine to fight back.

So we're reduced to the sorry spectacle of the Democrats selling out health care reform for sixty votes in the Senate. They water the bill down, diluting it to the point of uselessness all to get those mythically important sixty votes. And we all lose in this madness. We get a crap bill that has a weak public option, that continues to put corporations first, all for the sake of not having to witness a filibuster.:puke:

Bring it on goddamnit. The least that these so called Democrats could do is give us decent health care reform bill, filibuster be damned. Forget sixty votes, give us what is right, decent health care reform and let it pass by only one or two votes. And let the uncaring ingrates filibuster! Bring it on, get on television and use that tried and true tactic of the bully pulpit, "Look at those obstructionists, they don't care about Americans' health." "They're talking while people are dying." "We're doing what the American people want and we've got the numbers to prove it." Etc. etc.

But sadly, we live in an era of spineless Dems, who are hiding behind the chimera of the necessity of a cloture vote so they don't have to fight. And thus, we all lost last night. Instead of getting a good bill with a strong public option, we're getting the insurance industry's wet dream of a reform bill, one that still leaves them large and in charge. And due to this Dem's lack of a spine, due to this falsehood of cloture, we're all going to get screwed by this madness once it becomes law.

We'll probably hear this same cloture crap during the climate change legislation debate. Don't fall for it. If you want a strong bill, write your Senator and tell them to buck up and give us a good bill, even if they have to fight a filibuster. We've suffered enough from these cowardly Senators, it is time they started fighting for what is right, what we want, not rolling over on their backs and pissing like scared pups whenever the idea of a Senate battle comes up.

Don't let this sixty vote crap fool you anymore.

[Champion Jack]

1. Well said

k and R

[BadgerKid]

2. Read this -- Cloture votes still needed along the way

as I understand it.

Yes the bills themselves need 50, but the votes that allow voting to take place / make changes need 60.

See this thread:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=433&topic_id=10791

[MadHound]

5. Steam roll or creep through, I don't care.

I find it despicable that Democrats are more interested in rolling over in order to get some sort of political "victory" than in actually fighting for what's right.

Yes, you need a cloture vote, but the mistake that the Democrats are making is watering down bills in order to get a cloture vote first time, every time. Rather than being willing to fight for what is right, Dems are watering down bills to the point where they're a corporate dream come true, so of course our corporately controlled Senators, both Dem and 'Pug, will vote for these pieces of milk toast.

The cloture vote used to be no big deal, because the opposing side knew that they were in for a political ass kicking if they tried filibustering a bill. Thus, it was rarely used, usually only if those in opposition knew that they had the public on their side. Now, it seems as though a filibuster is to be avoided at all costs, especially when those costs will be paid by we the people and not those in the Senate.

Thus we continue to now get POS bills that at best do nothing, and at worst actually do more harm than good. All so Dems can declare some sort of "victory". Meanwhile, we the people are screwed over, again and again.

We need Dems with a spine, those who aren't afraid to fight, those who dare the 'Pugs to bring on a filibuster, just so they can have the chance to excoriate their opponents in the public arena. Instead, we're left with wimps and corporate stooges who allow the minority to control the debate. And it is we, us, not the Senators who are going to pay the ultimate price for their spinelessness.

[fasttense]

3. Explain to me how the Dems can force a real live filibuster?

I thought that because of some Senate rule changes back in the civil rights days that procedural filibusters were the rule. That any Senator could declare a filibuster then go out to dinner and a movie while still supposedly filibustering.

I read somewhere that the Senate Majority Leader could, if he deemed it necessary, force a real live filibuster. But I've never found back up information supporting this statement.

Do you have a link? Can you explain how the Dems can force a real live filibuster?

[MadHound]

6. It is up to the Senate majority leader,

Which sadly, given Reid's nature, explains why we're letting the minority control the debate.

All Reid as to do is tell the 'Pugs to start talking, but he won't. He and the rest of the Dems hide their perifidy behind the polite fig leaf of a "procedural filibuster".

Reference Senate Rules for further studying. They're at senate.gov

[jimlup]

4. Maybe I'm mistaken but this isn't closure...

This only allows the debate to move forward. It doesn't mean the debate can "end" which is what a filibuster actually is. As I understand it we have yet another 60 vote hurdle to go.

I'll admit to not being interested enough to actually read the news articles... I know where I stand on health care and it is far to left of what is being debated so I'm just hoping we can get something we can work with rather than something that will make the inequities worse.

[MadHound]

7. This was a cloture vote,

It was to rule out the bullshit of a procedural filibuster. It is a false hurdle that the Senate has set up so that they can cover their asses about how spineless they are. Reid and the Senate Dems could have passed a must stronger bill, Reid could have forced a real live filibuster and we could have wound up with a much stronger law. Instead, we're getting Democratic "victory" and a nightmare for we the people.

[godai]

10. And now, at best there are 59 votes. Lieberman is gone.

More cloture votes are coming. The Senate is a joke. They're playing games and believe that this is their job. Landrieu bragged that her payoff wasn't $100 million. It was $300 million.

[coti]

15. I'm sorry, but you're not right.

They can still filibuster by neverending debate.

Last night's vote only brought the bill to the floor for debate. That's it.

[MadHound]

20. Umm, sorry, but you're wrong

"Ed. Note: as of 8:10 p.m. ET, the Senate voted 60-39 for cloture on the Health Care Reform bill. Debate on the bill will proceed after the coming holiday break."

<http://firedoglake.com/2009/11/21/liveblog-senate-vote-on-cloture-for-health-care-reform-bill/>

Yes, they can, and will, continue debate. Cloture gives the Senators one hour each for floor speeches, but the debate is not going to be never ending, that's what cloture does, limits the time of debate.

I suggest that you go re-read your Constitution. Article I would be a good place to start in this case.

[coti]

22. LOL. I'll go ahead and bookmark, shoot you a PM when they end debate.

This wasn't the cloture you're thinking about.

You'll notice in the articles you're reading references to crazy amounts of debating through the month of December- that's because they're still debating (just began, actually). They will continue to until they can get the cloture vote that will end debate.

Have a look at the NY Times article that came out this morning:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x7066460

I know you put a lot of work into writing all this but you shouldn't continue pushing incorrect ideas for others to believe just because of that.



P.S.- The Senate makes its own procedural rules. Article I of the US Constitution makes no mention of Senate procedure. Maybe you should have a look yourself?

[godai]

9. Seems you're correct. Another 60 vote requirement is upcoming.

WP: And the big shakedown is yet to occur: That will happen when Reid comes back to his caucus in a few weeks to round up 60 votes for the final passage of the health bill.

---------------------------

This explains how Lieberman voted yesterday (with the 60) vs what he said about his 'good conscience'. Seems, no way he votes yes next time.

[lxlxlxl]

8. but what about incrementalism?

yes, the current distribution of dems makes the right-wing side of the party strong enough to derail progressive health care, economic, or foreign policy goals.

BUT -- if we pass a health care bill now, can't we make amends down the line? how come everyone is acting like THIS IS THE ONLY HEALTHCARE BILL EVER. We can make adjustments four or six years from now.

On the other hand, if we do not get a bill pass, and people like you, who think a numerical majority should equal political change quickly, give up on the democrats, you will get another Bush in 2012 or 2016, and where will any progressive gains go? If we dont pass a bill and the media and GOP prove to the country that voting for democrats doesnt mean anything, you don't think that Pres Obama will be hamstrung with reduced majorities or worse in the House and Senate after next year?

I dont like this bill its true. I dont think its the end of the world if it passes, but I think I can see the end of the world scenario if it doesnt.

[MadHound]

12. We're being killed by incrementalism

You think that we can make adjustments in a few years, sorry, but at this rate the 'Pugs will be back in the saddle in a few years.

Furthermore, look at history, the last major health care bill to pass was over forty years for me, which means that for middle age people like myself, this is it, period.

Sorry, but I refuse to give in to the lunacy that a numerical majority shouldn't or doesn't equal quick political change. That is exactly what happened under Bush, Bush, Reagan, Nixon, LBJ, FDR. It only seems to not equal quick political change during the past twenty years, and only when Dems are in power. But history belies your argument, makes it a mockery. What you're preaching here is just more excuses.

Furthermore, your argument that if we don't pass some sort of healthcare bill now, we'll suffer in the future. Get this loud and clear: If we don't get a decent health care reform bill now, if instead we settle for a POS just to claim a political "victory" then the Democratic party WILL suffer in 2010, 2012 and beyond because the progressive base will abandon the party in droves, seeing no point in voting for either of the corporately controlled parties.

Therefore is it not better to fight for what is right, and when the war than settling for a "victory" in a single battle, but proving that your party is no better than their party?

And while this may not be the end of the world for you, it could literally be just that for many millions of people as they are dragged down into poverty by this mandated monopoly we're getting ready to hand over to the insurance industry.

Sorry, but the time for incrementalism is past. The time for settling for shit, just to score political "victories" is long gone. We desperately need real change in this country, otherwise we the people are going to be swamped by Corporate America. So it is time for the Democratic party to stand up and fight, or else retire from the field and let the more willing and able to carry on the battle.

[lxlxlxl]

16. 'if the progressive base abandons' is a big IF

i dont think the progressive base will abandon the dems if they don't want another bush/palin/beckista. that's absolutely phony. after the last eight years, there is no one I know that would settle to live in another bushland.

but why is passing an imperfect bill 'defeat'? we've endured a vampiric insurance system for how long? why not pass something now, reinforce political majorities, get the money out of politics (the real fight in my eyes) and pass better bills later? this doesnt have to be the last health care bill passed in our lifetime, unless you make it that way.

the time for incrementalism has not passed. this country re-elected fuckhead bush twice. we have a political system based on money designed to be conservative. if anything, our priorities should be to get the money out of politics, and realize how deeply conservative our political structures are.

[MadHound]

19. The progressive base has been abandoning politics for years and decades now,

If you look at the political leanings of those who no longer vote, you'll find that they're overwhelmingly liberal, that they've become so disgusted by this two party/same corporate master system of government that they simply threw up their hands and no longer participate. In fact many people argue that it was the liberals, going for Nader, that cost Gore the 2000 election. If you keep alienating your base they'll keep leaving and the Democratic party will lose, it's that simple. You have to give people a reason to stay in the big tent, FDR and others knew this and thus would occasionally throw the liberal base a bone. This hasn't happened in years and decades, so the Democratic party has, and will continue to hemorrhage liberals to that largest party of all, non-voters.

Passing an imperfect bill is not defeat. Passing a bill that hands the insurance industry a mandated monopoly, whose public option is more costly than the private one, is not only defeat, but actually is against the interests of we the people. That's what this bill does, it continues to feed the beast more and more money. That's defeat, not an imperfect bill.

And let's look at revisiting this issue. Heath care reform has been kicked around for nearly one hundred years. Clinton took a swing at it fifteen years ago, and struck out. Almost thirty years before that was the last health care success, the passage of Medicare and Medicaid. Before that, even though FDR and TR both tried to bring about health care reform, they failed. So let's see, one success in nearly a hundred years, that's not a good track record, and doesn't bode well for your contention that we can "revisit" this in a few years. I'll most likely be long dead and gone when we finally pass meaningful health care reform at the rate we're going.

Furthermore, your defeatist attitude that ours is a conservative society is based on a false logic. Yes, conservatives have a loud voice, amplified by the corporate media. You have a corporately compromised government, I agree, we need publicly funded elections to take corporate money out of our government. But to say that our society is, overall, a conservative one, is to give too much credence to the loud voice of conservatives, and not actually pay attention to the numbers. Again, let me refer you back to the number of non-voters in this country. These are, as many studies will tell you, overwhelmingly liberal. Give these people a reason to vote, a reason to participate in our government, and you will find out just exactly how liberal our country is. Stop playing the defeatist card, stop giving credence to the storm and fury on the left, and look instead at the actual strength and numbers on the left. Then start giving those on the left a reason to join you instead of continually caving to the fiction of a conservative nation.

[stray cat]

11. Some DUers seem to think one vote is sufficient if its the vote they want

[jpak]

13. Don't look if you do not want to see the sausage being made

and it's still being made

[MadHound]

14. We're not making sausage with this bill,

We're seeing a Christmas gift being made, wrapped up and tied with a pretty red bow on top. The sad thing is, this gift isn't for the American people, it's being given to the insurance company, and we're all going to pay for this gift, boy are we going to pay and pay and pay.

But hey, all's well, just so long as the Democrats can claim a political "victory" right?:puke: Doesn't matter that this is going to drive the middle and working class into the ground with ever increasing insurance rates, now that insurance coverage is going to be mandated and the public option will deliberately be priced higher than the private one.

Would you buy this bullshit if it was coming from Richard Nixon? No, you wouldn't, but you're buying it when it comes from Obama and the Democrats, why? Oh, yeah, that letter "D" behind their names.

[phasma ex machina]

18. +1 Calling it "The Healthcare Tax Bill" seems more honest. nt

[bvar22]

23. Even more appropriate would be:

The Health Insurance Industry Profit Enhancement Bill


Milo yelled "And everyone has a share" as the bombs began to fall on their own base.


MISSION ACCOMPLISHED!

The DLC New Team
Real Democrats Need NOT Apply

(Screen Capped from the DLC Website)

[lonestarnot]

17. Never fooled, not even once!

Piss on those piglicons! Steam roll option!

[Individualist]

21. K&R

[Atticus]

24. Bring it on godamnit!" is more eloquence than many here are accustomed to,

but I, for one, agreed with every goddamn word of your post.