The Senate in One Sentence

“We have to have a little back-and-forth every once in a while or this place would be boring as hell.” — Orrin Hatch, to Supreme Court nominee Elena Kagan, after being shushed by Senate Judiciary Chairman Patrick Leahy for interrupting Kagan.

Never Stops, Never Stops

One million more states are holding primary elections today. Each one is wackier than the last. I’m not going to summarize them all, because I don’t care to think too much about places like South Carolina (even though it’s got the juiciest story).

Here, however, are the four marquee races to watch:

• Nevada Senate: Harry Reid, in the thankless role of Senate Majority Leader (think Tom Daschle), has been polling terribly at home all year, and everyone seems to agree that he’ll go down in November. But the emergence of a true Tea Party candidate, Sharron Angle, as poll leader on the GOP side has Democrats hopeful — Reid polls best against her. In a fun twist, Sue Lowden, the early GOP favorite and fundraising leader, lost her significant lead after she made some bizarre comments about solving health care costs by bartering with chickens. If Angle wins, Reid may survive.
• California Gubernatorial: Two strong female candidates in California have run, so far, two terrible campaigns. Yet they will live on to fight in November! Meg Whitman, former eBay CEO and Mitt Romney advisor, suffers from her old boss’s inability to take a firm position on any issue, but she’ll still probably get the GOP nod for Governor. Despite spending a fortune of her own money, Whitman trails Democratic former Governor Jerry Brown in the general election polls. Why anyone would want to be Governor of California at this point defies logic, but it should be a feisty (and expensive) campaign.
• California Senate: On the Senate side, the conventional wisdom holds that, in this anti-incumbent climate, Barbara Boxer is finally vulnerable. Maybe, but if the laughably incompetent Carly Fiorina wins the Republican nomination, as she should, I wouldn’t count on it. Fiorina has already released the most memorable ad of this campaign season, and continues to show her thin grasp of the issues by calling climate change “the weather.” I wouldn’t expect much from a fired Hewlett Packard CEO and economic advisor to the McCain campaign (how’d that work out for you?), but Fiorina’s bumbling campaign continues to surprise and delight. She’s within striking distance of Boxer, but if the primary campaign is any indication of how she’ll manage her messaging in the general, I wouldn’t bother dreaming of “Carlyfornia.”
• Arkansas Senate: Senator Blanche Lincoln’s political future hangs in the balance of today’s primary runoff, and Lt. Governor Bill Halter has all the momentum. Lincoln had Bill Clinton campaigning for her at the finish line, but it doesn’t matter: the GOP nominee, Rep. John Boozman, looks to trounce either Halter or Lincoln in the fall.

Stay tuned, sports fans.

(Faux) Summer Reading

It is way too gorgeous outside in Manhattan (high of 86!) to do any deep political thinking, or work, so I’d suggest you print out the following articles, find a nice bench or spot on the grass, and enjoy some light reading.

• Rachel Slajda at Talking Points Memo has an entertaining post on right-wing paranoia about the census.
• Since the disfunctions of the US Senate have been such a hot topic in these parts, I can’t recommend Jennifer Senior’s New York Magazine piece on the subject enough.
• Is there anything more entertaining than speculating about Supreme Court vacancies? Nope!
• Even though it’s a few week’s old, I’m still recommending Jane Meyer’s remarkably frank takedown of Marc Thiessen’s execrable book to everyone I know.
• Apparently I’ve been mispronouncing Jonathan Lethem’s last name for years.

OH NO: Socialism Has Come To America

Or rather: Yay, it happened!

I’m not going to wade into the actual politics that led to health care reform’s passage — Yglesias and Chait do a fine job of that, and Bart Stupak is just so tiresome to think about, and really, Peggy Noonan, is “demon pass” the best you could come up with?

The noise is just noise, especially when there are practical consequences to think about. Soon everyone will have health insurance! And yes, while it is true that the whole nightmare debate isn’t quite over — the reconciliation bill, which, don’t let’s forget, improves the package, still has to tumble through the Senate — it is also true that the bill passed by the Senate in December will, with the President’s signature this week, become law. A huge part of American life will be improved by the stroke of a pen.

What I think is interesting is what can happen next. Can, not will. There are so many predictions and opinions, and all the pundits are so convinced of their right(eous)ness:

It’ll kill the Democrats in November! Think again! Major reforms always become popular over time! It’s poisoned our politics! We’ll repeal it! Good luck with that! Baby killer!

Shut up, all of you. (Especially the last.)

If there’s any advice I would give to a casual observer of this mess, it would be to turn off the TV, click “close tab” on everything except cat videos and your Netflix Instant Player, and reflect on the fact that half a century of work by progressives has finally paid off. That’s a long time, and anyone who thinks they can untangle the meaning of it in less than 24 hours is fooling themselves. 99% of what the pundits are saying today will be meaningless by tomorrow. They have no idea what they’re talking about! Remember when everyone was saying reform was dead after a moderate Republican beat a terrible Democratic party hack in a special election by a few hundred thousand people in a state that already had universal health insurance? Yeah, exactly.

So let’s all do ourselves a favor, take a step back, and if like me you think health care reform was a moral and historical imperative, gloat softly, to ourselves. Of course it’s difficult not to enjoy the hilarity of the Right’s meltdown. Feel free to do that too. (I mean, come on. You can’t make this stuff up.) But there’s still plenty of work to be done — on jobs, on the environment, on gay rights, on any number of problems America faces today. But we can cross this one off the list, for now, and that’s something.

One last point: if for some weird reason you’re interested in what the reform package actually does (and when), check out here, here and here. You’ll be surprised how banal socialism is when you get down to the details.

Irreconcilable Differences

One of the more annoying tropes of the past few weeks, as it has become more and more likely that the Democrats will finally get their act together and inch past the goal line on health care reform, is the idea that budget reconciliation is somehow ”unprecedented” and “extreme” and ”jamming it through.”

This is bullshit, plain and simple. A few points:

First, it is, without question, not unprecedented. Even that dastardly Mainstream Media know this:

Second and more imporantly, the Democrats have already passed health care reform. All that’s left to do is find a way to reconcile (not exactly what “budget reconciliation” means, but we’ll get to that) the House and Senate bills. The difficulty is that since the Second Boston Massacre — WHICH CHANGED EVERYTHING DIDN’T YOU KNOW – the Democrats no longer have 60 votes in the Senate to pass an amended bill.

With the Senate GOP voting in lockstep against everything, the only way to get anything close to the (again, already-)passed bills to the President’s desk is for the House to pass the Senate’s bill. There are significant differences between the two, but the foundation is largely the same. What matters now is whether Pelosi and co. can get enough “no” votes to switch to “yes.” (And at least fewer “yes” votes to switch to “no.”) That is literally all that matters for health care to pass. Reconciliation is only a small part of the bargain between the House and the Senate to get that done.

If you watch CNN, however, you’ll see Mary Matalin, who is about as pleasant as bedbugs, drone on about how reconciliation is a travesty of democracy and will destroy the Democrats’ majority come November. Every other cable news network will carry another loathesome version of the same drivel. You’ll read more of this in the Washington Post and the Wall Street Journal and in a thousand witless posts on the Corner.

It’s all a big red herring.

Budget reconciliation, as I understand it, is just a patch for legislation that has already been approved. Because budget-related legislation is so complicated, involving so many committees, the budget reconciliation process allows policy changes to entitlements (such as MEDICARE) and tax laws to be passed in a streamlined, unfilibusterable way, to avoid total gridlock. After all, the federal government’s gotta have a budget, one way or another. If you’re really interested in the procedure, the House Rules Committee has a nicely dense summary.

In the case of health care reform, reconciliation will allow the Senate to appease House members’ concerns about things like affordability and the Medicare Part D “donut hole,” but not, since it’s not budget-related, things like the Stupak abortion language and the structure of the insurance exchanges. Still, still, still: all that matters is that the House pass the Senate bill.

The point is that reconciliation is the icing, not the cake. It doesn’t even actually have to happen for reform to pass. The worst fears of conservatives arrive earlier – health care reform is a few House votes away from becoming law. (I suspect the rumors of a smaller compromise bill are a political feint. Obama said as much yesterday.) The furor over reconciliation is merely a last-ditch effort on the part of Republicans to squeeze a little more political blood from the fight. They aim to tar Obama as a partisan, so they can run against him and his “socialized medicine” in the fall. Let them. Health care reform is too important, and too close, to be sacrificed on the altar of politics. The ineptitude of the Democrats over the past year has already guaranteed a bloody midterms. And the hubristic failure of Rove’s “permanent majority” should have Democrats realizing that huge majorities are unsustainable anyway.

Besides, if they don’t get health care reform passed, the Democrats are really screwed in November. They couldn’t be that stupid, could they?

Where Bills Go To Die

Not to beat a dead horse, but can we not agree there’s something seriously wrong with the US Senate? Senators are literally not doing their jobs anymore!

The Hill has a list of the 290 — yes, 290 — bills the House passed that the Senate has not yet acted on. Not “not passed.” These are bills the Senate has done nothing about, including quite a bit of major legislation. This is not even to mention, as Pareene does, the dozens of federal nominees the Senate has exclusive authority to confirm that it isn’t bothering doing anything about.

I know it’s an election year and all, but what exactly are these people doing with their time and on the taxpayer’s dime?

How Do You Solve A Problem Like The Senate?

Since we can’t just get rid of the damn thing (outrageous!), Christopher Beam offers eight ways to reform Senate rules, none of which will ever happen, because of Senate rules:

[T]he odds of streamlining the Senate anytime soon are low, thanks to a central paradox: Changing the rules surrounding the supermajority (60 votes) requires an even greater supermajority (67 votes). As of now, the political will simply isn’t there.

Why I Am Not A Conservative

A major topic of this blog since its inception has been the vacuous, uninformed nature of right-wing political discourse. I bemoan this fact because I believe in a robust dialogue, and as a temperament I believe conservatism has much to offer our politics. But what passes for conservatism these days is, in my opinion, a mostly content-free ideology. It’s nice to have this confirmed on my own blog.

A reader named Karl Keller has been commenting, quite passionately, on a few recent posts. I don’t know who Karl Keller is or anything about him, but since I want to take my readers’ dissents seriously, I thought his comments deserve a detailed response, which I try to make after the jump.

(more…)

A Solution To All Our Problems

Since the Senate is the source of so many political problems, here’s a great idea, via James Fallows, for how to fix it: let’s rearrange all the states! (Click to enlarge.)