Lieberman rides again?

[C_eh_N_eh_D_eh]

Check my figures here, please?

At this point, 56 seats in the Senate have been confirmed for the Democrats, and 40 for the Republicans.

Barack Obama and Joseph Biden are leaving, having recently been offered a couple of cushy chair-filler jobs in the executive branch. Their Senate seats will be filled by appointees from their home states (Illinois and Delaware, respectively). Both of those states have Democratic governors, so both of those seats will presumably stay blue.

Two of the remaining 4 seats are held by independents, Bernard Sanders and Joseph I. Lieberman. The other two are close runs and still undecided; one of them is Al Franken's prospective seat, but I don't know anything about the other one. If they both win, the count will be 58 - 40.

Cloture votes in the Senate require 60 votes to pass.

Ergo, if both Franken and the other Democrat should win their Senate seats, then Bernie Sanders and Joe Lieberman will be in a position to make or break Republican filibusters in the Senate. Lieberman, certainly, is of the opinion that both parties owe him big, and will no doubt make the most of this opportunity.

In summary, MOTHERFUCKER'S STILL NOT GOING TO GO AWAY!!!

[BrklynLiberal]

1. I hope that is not true.

[Stellabella]

2. Yeah, I was doing that math too, and I don't like it.

[WCGreen]

3. The only way to handle Joementum is to sit him down, give him

an assigned committee and tell him if her refuses to go along with the democratic agenda, they will strip away everything resembling any kind of status within the Senate...

They should make it clear they will remove any pet projects for Conn and make sure that the people in Conn know it is because of Joey that they aren't getting stuff other states do...

[alittlelark]

4. Collins, Snowe, Hagel... they will likely be the REAL power

All 3 are 'sane'. They will have to figure which side their bread is buttered on.

[Doctor Cynic]

5. Don't worry. My gut feeling is that he will quit outright and form the Likud Party.

[tabatha]

6. 57 with Oregon.

[robinlynne]

7. oh shit. two more years?

[Tarheel_Dem]

8. I think the other race is the Chambliss/Martin race in GA, if I'm not mistaken.

Your point is well taken. For some reason, I think Coleman will wind up retaining his seat, just like Bachmann, which give us 57(D)+2(I), and only getting to 59 will still make Joe completely irrelevant. I really, REALLY don't want Joe Liebermann to have that kind of power, but maybe I'm missing the big picture because I despise him so much.

[Jack Rabbit]

9. Not correct

Neither Sanders nor Lieberman were up for re-election this year.

The undecided seats are Minnesota (Colemam v. Franken), Alaska (Stevens v. Begitch), Georgia (Chambliss v. Martin) and Oregon (Smith v. Merkley).

[C_eh_N_eh_D_eh]

11. That's not what I said.

I said the indie seats (neither of which were up for grabs this year) make up two of the four that had not (or not yet) been declared for either D or R.

[Jack Rabbit]

15. While that is true . . .

. . . both Sanders and Lieberman caucus with the Democrats, so they are part of the Democratic majortiy.

Lieberman may be booted out of the caucus or voluntarily leave by January 3, when the 111th Congress convenes.

There were four seats not yet called (listed above). One of those (Oregon) went Democratic a short time ago this evening, which I learned between writing that post and this one. That's a pick up for the Democrats, giving them 57 seats, including Lieberman and Sanders, while the Republicans have 40. Alaska appears to be staying Republican, but they're likely to have to do this again if and when Senator Stevens is expelled. Minnesota and Georgia both look like they're going for a recount.

Something of which you should be aware (my apologies if you are) is that party discipline means little in Congress, unlike countries with a British-style parliament. The Senate Majority Leader (currently Harry Reed of Nevada) can't very easily say "we're all voting this way or somebody going to catch hell" and make it stick. So, as far as a cloture motion is concerned, there really is no such thing as a filibuster-proof majority.

Another wild card in this discussion is possible Republican defections. Olympia Snowe and Susan Collins are most often mentioned as possible defectors among current Senate Republicans. This looks to have been a watershed election, so it is very possible we'll some party changes (other than Lieberman) when the new Congress convenes.

[C_eh_N_eh_D_eh]

10. Well, it's only a problem with party-line votes.

I don't think cloture calls see as many of those. Do they?

[lapfog_1]

12. Lieberman is already counted in the 56.

the remaining 4 are:

MN (Coleman or Franken)
GA (runoff, likely staying R)
OR (probably going to be D)
AK (Stevens will "win", probably kicked out, will be replaced by someone R, and will stay R after the special election).

So... if Franken wins a recount and Oregon holds... counting Lieberman and Sanders, we have 58.
Even should we win the runoff in GA somehow... it's still only 59.

Not close enough to be filibuster proof.

Lieberman now serves no useful purpose. He might as well declare R. I suspect that Reid will politely suggest this tomorrow in their closed door meeting. But he won't be welcome in the caucus or his chairmanships.

Lieberman, apparently, told the Democratic leadership that he would "speak at the Repuke convention, but not say anything negative about Obama, a fellow caucus member". He broke that promise and there are plenty of Dem Senators that wish nothing more to do with him.

[C_eh_N_eh_D_eh]

13. That's a relief.

The results graphs I saw didn't make that clear.

[krkaufman]

14. Right. And so is Bernie. n/t

[no_hypocrisy]

16. Isn't it possible for a republican who's independent to cross party lines to break a filibuster?

The Party has a lot of soul-searching and perhaps the Senate and the House won't be as divided as it was, esp. if the Dems do compromise with them.

[KharmaTrain]

17. Play Him Vs. Him Playing Us...

First thing...the organization rules of the next Senate will be far different than the past one. Reid doesn't rely on Traitorman's vote to set up the rules he will work under. In 2007, without Traitorman's vote, McConnel would have been leader, not Reid...that's why he was allowed to keep his chairmanships. Now let's see if that remains?

We'll be playing with a new dynamic next year. First, and most important, is the power of the Executive...we saw for 8 years how it was used constantly against us. Now that power is on our side...and with it Teddy Roosevelt called the "bully pulpit". I see moderate repugnicans like Snowe and Voinovich...both up in '10 crossing over more times than not...the pressure will be on their side to keep their bloc solid.

Traitorman is truly a party of one now...he's pissed off a lot of Democrats and has no home in the GOOP. He'll vote with us on most social bills...and in the first couple months that's gonna be a major focus of an Obama administration.