Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

BeyondGeography

(39,374 posts)
Wed May 1, 2013, 10:04 AM May 2013

FDR had filibuster-proof majorities in the Senate in three of his first four Congresses

A Quick Note On One Reason Why FDR Was Effective In Ways Obama Is Not

(Or why we should stop with FDR/Obama posts that don't acknowledge these simple facts.)

73rd Congress:

Senate: 59 Ds, 36 Rs
House: 311 Ds, 117 Rs

74th Congress:

Senate: 70 Ds, 23 Rs.
House: 322 Ds, 103 Rs.

75th Congress:

Senate: 75 Ds, 16 Rs.
House: 334 Ds, 88 Rs.

76th Congress:

Senate: 70 Ds, 22 Rs
House: 256 Ds, 173 Rs.

These all come at the beginning of each term and carry us through January, 1941. So, for his first two terms, FDR’s smallest majority in the Senate was 21 23 and his average majority was 44.

In case you missed that: his average majority was 44 (bolded just f@#$#$$ because).

Number of votes needed to invoke cloture in the Senate during FDR’s first two terms: 64. So, for three out of four Congresses during FDR’s first two terms, he had a filibuster-proof majority.

In the House, FDR’s smallest majority was 83 and his average majority was 186.

Yes, he had to deal with a lot of conservative Southern Democrats during this period who would be Republicans now. You can, however, lose a lot of people and still win the vote when your majority is in the “Holy @#$#, How Large Is Your Majority?” range.

It’s easier to be a great President when your party owns the legislative branch.

http://chronicle.com/blognetwork/edgeofthewest/2013/04/22/a-quick-note-on-one-reason-why-fdr-was-effective-in-ways-obama-is-not/
13 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies

frazzled

(18,402 posts)
1. And he still had to make massive compromises with conservative Southern Dems
Wed May 1, 2013, 10:13 AM
May 2013

that would raise hackles today.

yurbud

(39,405 posts)
4. and that is why Obama picked an ed sec who is trying to privatize K-12 and bust unions?
Wed May 1, 2013, 10:48 AM
May 2013

Did Republicans twist his arm to make him to that?

 

alcibiades_mystery

(36,437 posts)
5. And he still managed to ignore anti-lynching legislation or any bill that would annoy the Dixiecrats
Wed May 1, 2013, 10:52 AM
May 2013

Ho hum, whatever, yo!

Tralalala.

loyalsister

(13,390 posts)
8. The WPA also discriminated against people with disabilities
Wed May 1, 2013, 01:29 PM
May 2013

a practice that was challenged by an advocacy group- the League of The Physically Handicapped

 

MrSlayer

(22,143 posts)
13. And we could have had the same if the 2009 Congress didn't bend over backwards for the corporatists.
Wed May 1, 2013, 08:31 PM
May 2013

They should have rammed through the fixes that we needed. We could be at full employment, had card check, had at least a public option, raised taxes to where they should be, jailed the banksters and war criminals, had a proper stimulus, infrastructure, Wall Street oversight, real financial reform, real voting reform and so on and so on. But our majorities were wasted because of the corporate sell out pieces of shit in this party and because the President wanted so badly to get along with the assholes on the other side. 2009 was no time for bipartisanship or co-operation. It was a time to fix the very serious problems and tell the regressives and neo-cons to go fuck themselves. After they did what was needed they could consider compromise. But it has to be the other way around when you're in power. You make them come to you, you don't go to them. You make them slide to the left instead of always sliding to the fucking right.

2010 would have been much different if we would have done what the People wanted done. Every time you do great things, you gain seats.

I hate the way the Republicans can always walk and vote in lockstep but we can't get together to cook dinner because of some bought off scumbag. A strong leader would have threatened the Blue Dogs with whatever was necessary to gain their votes. Twist their fucking balls until they scream. We needed a ramrod and we got a wet noodle.

I'm disgusted, all of this teabagger bullshit could have been avoided with three simple words, Medicare for All.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»FDR had filibuster-proof ...