Feeds: 
symbol identifies content for paid subscribers only.
FRANKEN MAY HAVE WON, BUT SENATE SUPERMAJORITY STILL HAS CRACKS.
After eight months and $50 million dollars, today’s unanimous decision by the Minnesota Supreme Court declaring Al Franken the winner in his Senate race against Norm Coleman could be the first step toward ending the longest Senate vacancy in 34 years. But before Senate Democrats and liberal bloggers crow too loud over their oh-so-close filibuster-proof majority in the Senate, a few things to keep in mind….
First, even if Franken is seated, he will not make for a particularly crisp #60. Though no one wants to say it, it is not clear that Sen. Ted Kennedy will ever vote again in the Senate, given his medical condition. Massachusetts lawmakers are already quietly jockeying for his seat. A replacement senator in Massachusetts needs to be chosen by the electorate (the governor has no role), which could mean weeks, even months, for primary and general election campaigns to be conducted. Meanwhile, after a month in the hospital, Sen. Robert Byrd was released today to continue his recovery at home, but the 91-year-old remains in delicate health.
Even if senators always voted party-line, which they don’t, it takes 60 senators present and voting to vote cloture. Democrats aren’t there yet.
While the verdict for Franken is a victory for Democrats, in many ways the GOP stall has had its intended effect. It is a public-relations accomplishment: They’ve managed to blur the likely result of the 2008 election, casting doubt on the circumstances under which Democrats have come to dominance in the Senate. That’s not a trivial accomplishment during these early months when a new president’s political capital is at its peak.
While there will be plenty of hand-wringing over how Republicans have hurt the state by drawing out a race Minnesotans wanted to be over long ago, nothing has been irreparably damaged by this extended vacancy. It isn't like Gov. Sanford disappearing for a few days. Executives really do run things. Senators don't. While it’s unfortunate that senior Minnesota Sen. Amy Klobuchar’s office has had to pick up the slack, the Democrats in the Senate haven’t lost any roll call result through the absence of a Franken vote.
More than anything, this prolonged partisan battle has been a headache for a state that’s famous for its friendly demeanor and squeaky-clean politics. It’s been an oft-repeated refrain in the last eight months, but it’s still true today: We’ll have to wait and see (though hopefully not for too much longer).
--Marie Diamond
Marie Diamond is a Prospect summer 2009 intern.
COMMENTS (10)
On the topic of Democratic fractiousness, what types of measures has the Democratic Senatorial caucus implemented for rewarding party loyalty ?
While committee positions are based on seniority, aren't there other perks and rewards that could be tied to party cohesiveness (e.g, offices, staffing, etc.) ? While the party shouldn't "punish" a Senator for a truly principled vote, party loyalty on procedural matters (particularly cloture votes) should be rewarded.
Posted by: H-Bob | June 30, 2009 6:24 PM
Well, H-Bob, LBJ used to use money. In other words, if you don't vote for A, then when B is passed your district isn't going to get one iota of that.
Posted by: masslib | June 30, 2009 9:45 PM
The pope had been wounded in his stomach, right elbow and index finger of his left hand. He was transferred to an ambulance, which sped him to a hospital.
Posted by: runescape power leveling | June 30, 2009 9:59 PM
"They’ve managed to blur the likely result of the 2008 election, casting doubt on the circumstances under which Democrats have come to dominance in the Senate."
No, not even a little bit. To the extent that this has entered the public consciousness at all (which is very little), it has done so along the lines that Coleman is needlessly, ridiculously delaying the inevitable. Even the late night guys were making jokes along those lines. No one doubts who won the 2008 elections, or how they did it.
"While there will be plenty of hand-ringing over how Republicans have hurt the state by drawing out a race Minnesotans wanted to be over long ago, nothing has been irreparably damaged by this extended vacancy."
Which ties into my thought on the public concious- this situation was so inconsequential to most people, and so easy to fix, that any "blurring" or "doubt" that it created- which I still think is NONE- isn't going to matter.
Posted by: colby | July 1, 2009 9:57 AM
" It is a public-relations accomplishment: They’ve managed to blur the likely result of the 2008 election, casting doubt on the circumstances under which Democrats have come to dominance in the Senate."
Who, exactly, thinks that?
Posted by: Steve C | July 1, 2009 10:20 AM
Of course it has cracks, democratic majorities always have cracks because basically their coalition is wider. They still have a few representatives and senators in the Republican heartlands while the Republicans have few senators and very few representatives in the Democratic strongholds. There's no PR victory for Republicans here, they haven't blurred anything. If anything the Franken victory which has to be bile and wormwood to them since they particularly despise this guy just reaffirms in the public mind the democratic victory. Turning to subject of nose counting. What's this obsession with 60? If push comes to shove and it might the dems have the votes to pass most stuff on reconciliation. They are attempting to work with Republicans because they have to (they can't just shut the Republicans out) and there are political dividends of at best perceived unanimity or at worst kudos for trying. And if it comes to passing healthcare Bobby and Kennedy will be there on gurneys if they have to.....and that will be another political black eye for the Republicans.
Posted by: Ottovbvs | July 1, 2009 10:44 AM
This Captcha is rude and insulting. I enter the letters, it says they are wrong AND TRASHED MY ENTIRE POST. You utter time wasters. How dare you disrespect me like this? It didn't even remember the personal info.
I am not seeing any political advantage for the Republicans here. Obama's public rating is still very high and none of his big agenda items is ready for a Senate vote.
Presidential ratings decline after the first few months because they are forced to start making choices.
Kennedy will almost certainly return to vote for the health care bill. Are the Republicans going to defy a clear electoral mandate to deny a dying man the chance to see his life's work accomplished? He is more use to the Democrats in his current condition than if he was replaced.
The Senate filibuster only has real value when the minority party in the Senate also has the White House. The GOP was able to ignore Democrats attempts at a filibuster because they could always just add some days to the schedule and wait the thing out. From 2006-2008 the Republicans were able to credibly filibuster because a party that can't raise a filibuster can't raise a Presidential veto either.
The Dems will get both Health Care and Cap and Trade. If necessary they will put them through as budget resolutions which only require 51 votes.
The other big ticket item Obama is after is immigration reform. I think that is the one that will end up stalled and come to an actual showdown.
60 votes will definitely come in handy when it comes to issues like Don't Ask Don't Tell.
Posted by: Philip Hallam-Baker | July 1, 2009 1:30 PM
"hand-wringing" not the other.
Posted by: spellchecker | July 2, 2009 1:01 PM
Obama will not have a trouble with a super majority, The will decide how many voted they need and tell those who are not up for re-election they can vote not. They have enough RINO's to cover them and they will probably declare they are Demorats before the summer is over anyway. He will have a free hand to rape, plunder and pillage the American economy at will and tax us out of exixtance. Hopefully the Kool Aid drinkers will wake up before we are turned into a third world country economy by this administration.
Posted by: jmsmaxwell | July 2, 2009 7:11 PM
This is the last piece in the puzzle. Now the senate can say they have a court jester (even though AF is a washed up comedian) to go along with Queen Poloosy and King Harry.
They can have it all.
But, by 2012 they will be facing a lynch mob and AF will be one of the first to go.
Ironic that a bozo like AF can get elected to a high office and no one seems to give a damn. I think it's just the people of MN playing a joke on the rest of us.
Will they be broadcasting SNL from the forum now instead of NY?
Posted by: IsleOracle | July 2, 2009 8:27 PM