The New World of U.S. Senators Barbara Sinclair

“Textbook” Senate (1-3) Development of the Individualist, Partisan Senate The Senate has experienced dramatic institutional changes. Though few of the rules have changed, how Senators used their various prerogatives and power has varied greatly over since the 1960s. Traditional Senate: Committee-Center, Conservative and Static The traditional senate was a highly homogenous, inward-looking, and generally conservative chamber. Its turnover was low, as was the number of its legislative achievements. Senators spent most of their time supporting each others constituency-specific legislation and projects. …

Development of an “Individualist” Senate (3) 1958: Transformative Election The election produced a sizable turnover in the Senate. The majority of the new members were northeastern Democrats who challenged both the conservative and insular nature of the Senate.

Development of an “Individualist” Senate (3) Senate and 1960s: Rise of “Individualist” Senators These changes were exacerbated by the broader cultural changes in the 1960s. As the policy community diversified in the 1960s, and new groups began to press government for social change, Senators were increasingly afforded an opportunity on an individual as political and policy leaders. Senators became more: Outward Looking Focused on Interest Groups Concerned about Policy Community Media Consciousness

1980s: A Partisan Senate (4) Senate and the 1980: Shift to the Right After the 1980 election, and the Republican capture of the Senate, partisan lines began to be drawn more firmly in the chamber. …

1980s: A Partisan Senate (4) Rise of Right: Shift to the South Among the eleven once solidly Democratic “Confederate” southern states, the number of Republicans has grown steadily since the late 1960s: Southern Republican Senators: 1961: 0 1973: 7 1980: 10 1990: 13 (59%)

1980s: A Partisan Senate (4) Party Line Voting: Majority of Democrats Against a Majority of Republicans The occurrence of party line voting increased from one third of all senate roll call votes in the 1960-1970s to nearly two-thirds in 1990s. “In 107th Congress (2001-2002), 89 % of Democrats opposed 88 % of Republicans on a typical party vote.” …

The Legislative Process in the Contemporary Senate How has individualism and partisanship impacted the Senate? Individualism and the Senate: Power of Members, Weakness of Leadership Individualism transformed how committee work and flooring procedures happen in the Senate. It did so in large part by denying the leadership effective control over the process. …

Majority Leadership and the Senate Floor (6) Floor Procedures: Right of First Recognition To bring legislation to the floor, the majority leader can either: 1) Move that a bill be taken off the calendar and considered 2) Ask for a Unanimous Consent Agreement (UCA) …

Majority Leadership and the Senate Floor (6) Filibuster and Cloture Vote Consideration of a bill is subject to extended debate, which can only be stopped by a cloture vote, which requires a supermajority of 60 votes. Such an action, which mostly destroys the legislation under consideration is a filibuster.

Majority Leadership and the Senate Floor (6) UCA, Filibusters and “Holds” The process of requesting a UCA is also subject to a filibuster. In the process of requesting a UCA, the majority and minority leaders communicate their desire for a UCA through the use of the party secretaries, who broadcast to all senators who have requested they be notified. Any member can debate/filibuster the legislation. They often signal their objection to a piece of legislation through a “hold” letter that requests they be informed about the legislation. Filibusters have become more common. (Table 1-1)

Majority and Minority, Cooperation and Conflict Challenges of Leadership in the Senate: The permissive structure of the Senate poses numerous challenges for party leaders. Leaders are responsible for ensuring the chamber functions, but they are also partisan, and have to be responsive to their rank and file. Individualism, Partisanship and the Media Feeding Frenzy These challenges have been heightened by the: Slim margins of Majority Control Increased Party Polarization Use of Media and PR Tactics …

Majority and Minority, Cooperation and Conflict Partisan Conflict in the Senate Examples of partisan conflict in the Senate include: Majority Tactics: Republican: (Trent Lott) File for cloture vote immediately, pull bill until vote is due.

Majority and Minority, Cooperation and Conflict Majority Tactics: Democratic: (Tom Daschle) Block partisan legislation Examples: Homeland Security Department Iraq War Resolution. Minority Tactics: Party Cohesion Block 60 votes required for Cloture.

Legislative Outcomes (16-17) Consequence of a Individualist and Partisan Senate: How has the partisan division and individualist nature of the Senate affect legislative outcomes? Less Productive Senate: One answer is that it has made the Senate less productive: Percentage of Legislation that Failed (Table 1-3). 1990s (103-107): 42% 1980s (91-97): 27%

Legislative Outcomes (16-17) Senate Productive: Legislation does get passed in the Senate. Some of it is “must-pass” legislation (appropriations bills, for example). But how does anything else get passed? How does anything get done in the Senate? Despite the easy with which they can disrupt the process, most Senators want to “get things done” and therefore restrained from obstructing legislation. …

Legislative Outcomes (16-17) How Senatorial Behavior is Shaped: Reciprocal Damage: Senators are Equally Capable of Damaging each other. Reputation: Cannot be frivolous with “Holds,” it will weaken future threats.