Commentary
-
Our commentary partners will help you reach your own conclusions on complex topics.
We now know that Democrats will control the US Senate in the next two year period, not 50-50, requiring Kamala Harris for every tie breaking vote, but 51 to 49. And this happens as a result of the results of the December 6 Georgia Senate runoff wherein challenging Republican candidate Herschel Walker, lost to incumbent Democratic Senator Raphael Warnock. This dates back to the November 8 midterm elections. Georgia has a 50% rule. That rule states that if no candidate gets 50% of the vote, the top two vote-getters will be in a one versus one runoff, for lack of a better term, because of a third party candidate getting about 2% of the vote. Neither Warnock nor Walker achieved that 50% margin on November 8th, so roughly one month later, on
December 6, there was a runoff and indeed, Herschel Walker lost by about a point and a half roughly. This has significant implications, and they are far reaching. Now let’s kind of go from the narrowest to the broadest implications and considerations. Narrowly, first are, what are the logistical differences for Democrats with a 51-49 majority, as compared to a 50-50 majority where Kamala Harris is a tie breaking vote? Well, there’s a number.
Number one, you don’t have to negotiate what’s called a “power-sharing arrangement” with the minority, which is the Republicans.
And that’s a really great thing, because those power-sharing arrangements often require, or they don’t require, but they end up with, for example, 50-50 splits on committees. And this creates this really slow process, where if, imagine a committee with 16 senators, eight Republicans, eight Democrats, if they tie eight to eight, then the vote, whatever they’re voting on, comes out to the full Senate, and they vote and then it’s 50-50. And then you bring in Kamala Harris, and she is the tiebreaker. Democrats still have the majority, they’ll still get the votes, but it takes so much longer. And so without having to do the power-sharing arrangement, and having a 51-49 majority rather than 50-50, most likely the committees will have one more democratic seat than the Senate. So on a 16-person committee, instead of eight, it will be nine to seven, and it eliminates this entire problem. Number two, no one Democratic Senator will have what is effectively a veto power. Veto power meaning if it’s 50-50 and Joe Manchin doesn’t like a bill, then Joe Manchin effectively can just veto by saying I won’t vote for it. There will be a two Senator veto power, but now it means you need two instead of one senator to act together in order to do that. So that’s definitely an advantage for Democrats as well. Stronger power to issue subpoenas where subpoenas will no longer need bipartisan support out of a committee in order to get issued, that’s a convenience. And if there were to be a Supreme Court vacancy, it could be easier. It could be easier. You never know until you know, well, who is the nominee and what are the kinds of circumstances. And then lastly, on issues that need 60 votes to pass, you only need to find nine Republicans to vote with you instead of 10. It’s a small difference. On many things, you’re not going to find even two Republicans to vote for you. So nine versus 10 may not make a difference. But it gets you one vote closer on a number of these different issues. So for the next two years, that’s the important takeaway. Second takeaway, what about the 2022 midterms? Does our perspective on the 2022 midterms change because the Senate will be 51-49 rather than 50-50? Not really. I mean, either way, regardless of this particular race and its outcome, Democrats lost the House and maintained control of the Senate. But there’s kind of this funny imagery of it’s a red wave in which Democrats gained seats in the Senate, doesn’t really feel like a red wave when Democrats gain seats in the Senate. So that’s definitely an interesting component to it as well in terms of like our takeaway, broadly of the outcome of the 2022 midterms.
What does this mean about MAGA and Trump for 2024? This is, Trump had a number of failed endorsements, I know Trump will tout “Oh, I won 210 or something like that.” It’s easy to run up the endorsement score by mostly endorsing incumbents and the winners of Republican primaries in very red states. Anybody can do it right? The more difficult thing is winning with endorsements in contested consequential races.
Governor of Pennsylvania where Doug Mastriano lost, Trump’s endorsee. Governor of Arizona where Kari Lake lost. Or governor of Michigan, where Tudor Dixon lost. The Senate seat in Pennsylvania where Mehmet Oz lost. All of these, Trump endorsed people. And then meanwhile, Trump barely endorsing Ron DeSantis, who’s from an arguably different wing, at least at this point of the Republican Party, and DeSantis over blows the polling and wins by 19 instead of I believe it was 11 or 12 he was expected to win by. So now there’s the question of the Trump endorsement power for 2024. And there were increasing rumors that Trump may not even make it to the primary, that if this really continues to be so ugly, and someone like DeSantis declares and continues to pull well, and it just seems guaranteed Trump’s going to lose, there is increasingly speculation that Trump will bail before the first 2024 primaries rather than suffer a defeat. Remains to be seen.
-
Why Biden’s pardon of his son is justifiable
President Joe Biden is considering issuing broad pre-emptive pardons for individuals who might be targeted by President-elect Trump’s administration in retaliation for their involvement in his criminal cases. Biden recently issued an unconditional pardon for his son, Hunter, stating that he believed he had been unfairly targeted by political opponents. During his presidential campaign, Biden… -
Media gatekeepers falling down as online news influencers rise
The Washington Post lost over 10% of its paid subscription base after owner Jeff Bezos vetoed the editorial board’s presidential endorsement for Vice President Kamala Harris. MSNBC’s “Morning Joe” program lost one-quarter of its audience after news got out that the show’s hosts had traveled to Mar-a-Lago following President-elect Trump’s victory to privately discuss a… -
Trump’s win is hardly a landslide
President-elect Donald Trump secured a decisive victory, winning all swing states, the Electoral College and the popular vote. However, there is ongoing debate about whether it qualifies as a landslide by historical standards. While the vast majority of counties saw their margins shift in Trump’s favor, Trump won the popular vote by one of the… -
Top Democrat contenders for 2028 presidential run
Democrats are embarking on a soul-searching autopsy in the aftermath of the U.S. 2024 elections to try to understand how they lost the national popular vote for the first time in 20 years, in addition to losing both the White House and the Senate. A wide range of senior Democratic politicians, meanwhile, might already be… -
Blind devotion and ignorance deliver victory for Trump
After Donald Trump’s decisive Election Day victory, Democratic politicians are analyzing why they’re short of their projected results and how Trump surpassed those projections, particularly with voter groups that were once firmly in the Democratic camp. In the 2024 election, Trump expanded his support beyond white, blue-collar male workers and made inroads into Democratic strongholds…
Latest Opinions
-
FBI Director Christopher Wray to resign ahead of Trump inauguration
-
Arkansas Gov. Sanders calls for a ban on buying junk food with SNAP
-
Biden approves national security memo detailing cooperation by US adversaries
-
Google reveals ‘first-of-its-kind’ $20B renewable energy data center projects
-
Biden threatens to veto bipartisan bill that would let Trump appoint more judges
Popular Opinions
-
In addition to the facts, we believe it’s vital to hear perspectives from all sides of the political spectrum.