Campaign Diaries

Rumors are circulating that the Minnesota Supreme Court will issue its ruling on Norm Coleman’s election challenge in the hours ahead. That decision could potentially pave the way to Al Franken’s swearing-in, giving Democrats an additional vote in the Senate at a crucial time of the legislature.

Yet, while everyone is obsessed about Republican obstruction costing Democrats a seat in Minnesota, there is far less coverage of another vote Democrats have been missing: Teddy Kennedy has been absent from Washington for a year now. Democrats are said to control 59 seats, but they effectively have only 58; that makes much of the celebration of Specter and Franken giving the party a 60th vote moot.

Yes, I understand that Kennedy is sick and I wish him all the best. Yet, I am not sure why that is an excuse for holding up progressive reform for such a long time. There is a point at which a Senator (a 77-year old and 47-year incumbent, no less) who has not been capable of exercising his functions should realize that the country - and his party - would be better off if he resigned. A vote is a vote is a vote, and when we are talking about close roll calls there is no denying that Kennedy’s absence is making it much harder for the Democratic leadership to win tight votes.

(Remember: According to Senate rules, for a Senator not to participate to a cloture vote does not reduce the number of votes needed to reach a 3/5th majority; rather, it amounts to a “no” vote. To close discussion, Democrats need 60 votes, no matter how many of their members are in the chamber.)

Kennedy should resign, and do so quickly: The Senate is due to vote on a lot of important bills and contested appointments throughout the summer and fall.

Now, another Democratic Senator can no longer appear in the chamber: West Virginia Senator Robert Byrd, 91, was hospitalized three weeks ago. At first, his office said he was in for a minor infection but he has yet to exit the hospital, and there is little information as to what is occurring or where Byrd even is. Thus, we do not know whether Byrd will be in the Senate to vote over the summer or fall. That puts Democrats at 57 votes - 3 short of cloture.

West Virginia Governor Manchin said this week that such discussions are callous. But Byrd, who is now 91, has chosen not to retire and he cannot expect to be treated as a private citizen; he is a U.S. Senator, and he holds in his hands the fate of many political issues. It’s perfectly normal for Democrats to worry that his absence might impact health care reform, Sonya Sotomayor’s nomination and any other legislation that might come up in the months ahead.

Two tangible examples are the nominations of Harold Koh and Dawn Johnsen two key legal positions in the Obama administration who have not gotten a Senate vote for months as the Democratic leadership does not have the votes to get either of them approved. As far as I can see, no Democratic Senator has voiced opposition to Koh. As for Johnsen, only Ben Nelson, who also suggested that he would vote for cloture, and Arlen Specter, who most believe could be convinced to block a filibuster, have done so. By contrast, at least one Republican, Senator Lugar, has indicated he supports Johnsen’s nomination.

What we are talking about, then, is the Democratic leadership lacking one, perhaps two, votes to get either appointees confirmed. Whenever an article is written about these appointments, a lot of ink is spilled trying to determine which Democratic Senator are unwilling to support Koh and Johnsen. Who is responsible for holding up these appointees? Whose votes are lacking?

For some reason, Kennedy is almost never mentioned in this discussion, tough blogs have poured a lot of vitriol on Republican obstruction, on Norm Coleman’s challenge and on Ben Nelson’s vague statements. And yet, if we are talking about one to two votes missing, Kennedy’s absence explains much of it. Had Reid held a vote last month, Kennedy’s vote would effectively have been the same as that of Coburn, DeMint or worst-case-scenario-Nelson: NO on cloture. The fact of the matter is that the clearest obstacle to Koh and Johnsen’s confirmation is that Massachusetts effectively has one Senator.

Kennedy’s absence is also having a clear impact on health care reform. The HELP bill, the liberal alternative to the increasingly centrist legislation drafted by Max Baucus’s Finance Committee, is typically described as the “Kennedy bill.” But that is misleading: Kennedy’s staffers might be involved in efforts to draft the legislation, but the Massachusetts Senator has not been around to defend the proposal. This makes all the difference in the world: Chris Dodd might be presiding over hearings and the ‘Kennedy bill’ might have plenty of backers, but none of them are seen as influential players.

This situation, which might explain why the HELP committee’s actions have looked so disastrously amateurish, could result in the liberal option not being taken as seriously as the Finance Committee’s draft. That would be a fatal blow to liberal efforts to push Baucus leftward by forcing a compromise between the HELP and the Baucus bills.

All of this might be fine if we were talking about a one month absence, but it starts being a bit depressing when it lasts for over a year - even more so when we read about how Kennedy is trying to ensure that another member of his family is installed in the Senate by the time he leaves the chamber. First, it was his wife, in Massachusetts; then, his niece Caroline, in New York; and now, his nephew Chris, in Illinois.

Update: Just this afternoon came another example of Democrats struggling because of Byrd and Kennedy’s absence. The war supplemental spending bill barely survived in a 60-36 procedural vote, and only after the party leadership convinced Maria Cantwell to switch after initially casting a “no” vote. (4 Republicans voted “yes,” which was just enough to make up for Byrd and Kennedy’s absence.)