Mitch McConnell by Gage Skidmore
After Mitch McConnell became Senate Minority Leader in 2007, the yearly total of filibusters doubled . It's now assumed that any legislation over which there is disagreement requires a super-majority of 60 votes to pass.
By crippling the Senate in this
way, he has made the legislative process of the federal government mostly
dysfunctional. So there is no doubt that Kentucky's senior senator is a very
powerful man, for better or for worse.
There is a
procedure (often called the "nuclear option") by which a simple majority of 51
senators could overturn the 60-vote requirement. Since the Democrats have 52
senators (and two independents who caucus with them), Democrats could use the
nuclear option to break McConnell's stranglehold.
Yet they
lack the will to do so, and President Obama hasn't pressed them even though the
filibuster has blocked much of his agenda. So you could say that the Democratic
senators have chosen to give McConnell his power. They have connived with him
to create legislative gridlock. There are two reasons for this:
First, the difficulty of assembling a
super-majority magnifies the power of individual senators in both parties. Each
individual can drive a harder bargain for their vote and expect richer "inducements"
from lobbyists.
This only worsens
the already undemocratic nature of the U.S. Senate. Despite huge population
differences, each state has two senators. So the senators who drive a hard
bargain for adding their votes to a supermajority may come from states with a tiny
population compared to other states whose senators strongly support a bill. One
of the most infamous examples of this distortion was the " Cornhusker
kickback " to Sen. Ben Nelson (D-Nebraska) for his vote on Obamacare. (California
has twenty times the population of Nebraska.)
Second, some Democratic senators want to
be able to obstruct Republican legislation in case the GOP wins a majority in
the Senate in a later election, especially if a Republican wins the presidency
in 2016. To preserve this option, they're willing to extend Congressional
dysfunction into the indefinite future. Adolescent
libertarians may rejoice in this prospect, but the rest of us know that our
federal government needs to be able to enact legislation to address a rapidly
changing world. That's what Congress is for.
Because members
of Congress assume that most legislation dies in the Senate, sponsoring and voting
for bills often degenerates into cheap talk and demagoguery, especially for the
GOP. For example, two years ago Sen. Richard Burr (R-NC) introduced a bill to
eliminate the EPA, an agency created by Republican President Nixon. (The bill's
15 co-sponsors
were also global warming deniers.)
Would this have happened if there
were a chance of passing the bill? Would most Republican lawmakers want to live
in an unprotected environment, drinking and breathing a growing list of pollutants
and poisons and incurring the wrath of voters over the harmful effects of their
legislation?
On May 16 the House voted for the
third time to repeal the entire Affordable Care Act (ACA aka Obamacare). This
was the 37 th time the House had voted to repeal all or part of it--a repetitious
tantrum over major legislation the GOP had come so close to obstructing.
Would House Republicans be so eager
for total repeal if they thought their bill would pass the Senate? How would
their constituents feel when insurance companies resumed denying coverage for preexisting
conditions and refusing to renew policies for people who get sick? Would they welcome
back those annual and lifetime caps on coverage that leave people one serious
illness away from bankruptcy?
The deeply flawed ACA barely
managed to get 60 votes in the 2009 Senate just before the Democrats lost their
60-vote majority. In order to get past giant health industry lobbies and McConnell's
solid GOP phalanx, the bill had to get every last Senate Democrat's vote. The price
was major concessions such as stripping out the public option and failing to
negotiate drug prices.
The legislative
paralysis created by filibusters can't continue. It's a national embarrassment.
For as long as Congress lurches from one crisis to another without settling
anything, problems will only get worse and we, as a nation, will lose
confidence and self-respect.
Mitch
McConnell is Mr. Filibuster--he is the face of this paralysis that threatens our
future. Obstruction is his principal contribution to American political life.
This may be part of the reason why, according to Public Policy Polling, "Mitch
McConnell continues to rank as the most unpopular Senator [within his own
state] in the country."
According
to the latest PPP poll
(4/9/13), 54% of Kentuckians disapprove of his performance, and a mere 36%
approve. Yet only 25% of respondents described themselves as "very" or
"somewhat liberal." McConnell's 2014 re-election prospects are still good
because he runs a fiercely anti-Obama campaign that gets a lot of Kentuckians
to hold their noses and vote for him.
McConnell
still rages against the ACA. It's really sweet for him that this law is commonly
called Obamacare. This lets him merge Obama, the ACA and the federal government
into a single demon for Kentuckians to fear and hate. He offers nothing in its
place--just a return to the status quo before the ACA.
(Note: You can view every article as one long page if you sign up as an Advocate Member, or higher).