The “51 Presidents” Problem Remains
What it is, and what we can do about it
WAIT ... STOP! Stick together!The problem
There’s nothing quite like a taste of victory to ravage the unity of purpose that gets you that taste in the first place.
When you have a comfortable majority (say, 65 senators), differences of opinion and conflict with your colleagues can be handled gracefully — by listening, taking an opposing view into account, and letting the dissenters make their points by speaking out against, refusing to vote on, or voting against a proposal supported by the majority.
But we don’t have that now. As President Biden joked, “We have 50–50 in the United States Senate. That means we have 51 presidents. … Any one [of the 51] can change the outcome.” The result is the slimmest possible majority for Democrats, the narrowest of narrow margins.
There is no margin for error, but also no margin for conflict.
Conflict always exists within parties, but it’s usually papered over internally through persuasion, negotiation, or “agreeing to disagree.” In the “51 Presidents” situation the usual becomes crucial because any conflict is fatal to success. Internal conflicts must be resolved or (barring help from outside) defeat becomes a certainty.
“Fifty-one presidents” in action
WTH? … What happened?!
How is it that this one guy, Senator Joe Manchin, Democrat from West Virginia, gets to be the Senate’s “hall monitor,” approving or denying any Democratic legislation?
He’s not the Leader of the Senate, or the House. He’s not the real President.
He is chairman of the Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources — but that standing doesn’t seem particularly relevant to dealing with inflation, voting rights, progressive goals, or Senate filibuster rules. Why does he get to call the shots?
What happened to compromise? … What happened to negotiation?
- I get something; you get something.
- I give up something; you give up something.
- “Share and share alike.”
- Take turns getting a slice of the pie; be nice.
- Furthermore, whatever happened to “majority rules”? … he’s one guy.
Well, we know what happened in the Senate: a 50/50 split and Republican leadership deciding that blockade is easier than compromise — and much simpler to explain to the Pope in Exile down south.
But, really, doesn’t majority rule apply inside the Democratic Caucus?
Not in this situation, no.
Effects of the problem
The very narrow margin has an effect between the two parties; it increases competition because even a small change can affect the outcome. As a result, the argument for a compromise becomes much weaker, even though the compromise might be (1) better for the country, (2) less likely to be promptly reversed, and (3) have a more lasting impact.
The narrow margin also has an effect inside the two parties — it corrodes consensus.
Normally, if you’re a minority in a majority-vote system (as progressives are in the Democratic caucus), there comes a point at which you have to bow to the will of the majority.
In the “51 Presidents” situation, this general rule doesn’t automatically apply. Worse, success requires more than a majority, more even than consensus … it requires a unanimous verdict.
The Democratic party is more vulnerable to this corrosion because it is more welcoming to a variety of positions than the Republican party, especially lately. This “big tent” approach leads to more differences within the party, and requires even more internal cooperation.
There’s an analogy here to the difference between democracies and dictatorships, or between Biden’s administration and Trump’s.
Living with the problem
In a narrow margin situation like “51 presidents,” you cannot take people for granted — especially those in your own party. Negotiate as sincerely and diligently at home as you would with the opposition. Remind yourself that the Democratic family needs attention, too, and that they’ve “had your back” in the past — and will in the future, if treated with respect.
Take more time to negotiate within your own party than negotiating with the opposition because, without unanimity, there can be no success — at least not without some outside help.
This means that members of the party, elected representatives, will have to make some very hard decisions: balancing what they want, or believe is best for the country, against what can be achieved, and what they can explain to their constituents.
Fixing the problem
“51 presidents” is not going to change until the numbers change. The way that normally happens is by election, or by a senator being unable or unwilling to participate, which leads to the twin problems of:
- Republican assaults on voting rights and election procedures at the state level, and
- Republican use of the filibuster in the Senate to block progress on voting rights, as well as a number of other broadly popular Democratic priorities.
(More on these later.)
The moral of the story? Attend to and nurture the Democratic consensus. Make it as unanimous as possible, including the concerns of both progressives and moderates within the party. Don’t disregard the occasional trustworthy Republican either — any bipartisan component would be a major win.
It’s not all bad news
The difficult decisions being forced on Democrats will help to clarify and even unify a plan and message about what this party can get done — even when the country is faced with serious problems abroad and obstructions at home.
All of us face hard choices now. But if a consensus emerges from Democrats’ internal negotiations on what should and can be done, we could make American voters’ choice a lot easier.
It’s a stark contrast. While the Biden administration is facing up to global issues like the COVID-19 pandemic (still crippling the supply chains we all rely on) and the increasingly disastrous effects of climate change here and elsewhere, Republican leaders seem more focused on keeping what power they have and getting more, obstructing Democrats, and turning states whose legislatures they control into increasingly authoritarian personal kingdoms in which liberties they like are promoted and liberties they don’t are suppressed.
Nevertheless, bipartisanship is not dead. Putin’s invasion has roused many Republicans to join Democrats in helping Ukrainian military and civilians make a stand and “stop the bully” now.
The icy wall between the parties has thawed a bit. Make use of it.
Find common ground
Granted that’s rarely where anyone really wants to be, but that’s where the party, and the nation, can stand on solid footing, on shared values, together.
We can get to a better place, where Republicans can’t block Democratic legislation with a simple phone call:
“You know, I think we just might filibuster that bill you’ve spent months coming up with. Have a nice day!”
… and a single wayward Democratic senator can’t do it, either.
