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
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: I Know Some of You Don't Like President Obama, and Ima Let You Finish, but [View all]scarletwoman
(31,893 posts)26. In the interest of accuracy, let's be clear that there were only two short periods in 2009-2010
in which Democrats, and the 2 Independents who caucused with them, held 60 seats:
http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/did-the-democrats-ever-really-have-60-votes-in-the-senate-and-for-how-long/
Did The Democrats Ever Really Have 60 Votes In The Senate, And For How Long?
Doug Mataconis · Sunday, June 17, 2012
<snip>
Of course, as we all know too well, having majority control of both house of Congress doesnt necessarily mean much if the opposition in the Senate decides to filibuster your legislation, and without a consistent caucus of 60 votes to overcome a cloture vote, legislation can be effectively blocked.
That leads to the question of how long the Democrats actually had a filibuster proof majority in the 111th Congress. As this chart from Wikipedia reveals, it wasnt for a very long period of time at all: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/111th_United_States_Congress#Senate
What this shows is is that there were only two time periods during the 111th Congress when the Democrats had a 60 seat majority:
So, to the extent there was a filibuster proof majority in the Senate it lasted during two brief periods which lasted for a total of just over five months when counted altogether (and Congress was in its traditional summer recess for most of the July-August 2009 time frame).
Did The Democrats Ever Really Have 60 Votes In The Senate, And For How Long?
Doug Mataconis · Sunday, June 17, 2012
<snip>
Of course, as we all know too well, having majority control of both house of Congress doesnt necessarily mean much if the opposition in the Senate decides to filibuster your legislation, and without a consistent caucus of 60 votes to overcome a cloture vote, legislation can be effectively blocked.
That leads to the question of how long the Democrats actually had a filibuster proof majority in the 111th Congress. As this chart from Wikipedia reveals, it wasnt for a very long period of time at all: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/111th_United_States_Congress#Senate
What this shows is is that there were only two time periods during the 111th Congress when the Democrats had a 60 seat majority:
■From July 7. 2009 (when Al Franken was officially seated as the Senator from Minnesota after the last of Norm Colemans challenges came to an end) to August 25, 2009 (when Ted Kennedy died, although Kennedys illness had kept him from voting for several weeks before that date at least); and
■From September 25, 2009 (when Paul Kirk was appointed to replace Kennedy) to February 4, 2010 (when Scott Brown took office after defeating Martha Coakley);
■For one day in September 2009, Republicans lacked 40 votes due to the resignation of Mel Martinez, who was replaced the next day by George LeMieux
So, to the extent there was a filibuster proof majority in the Senate it lasted during two brief periods which lasted for a total of just over five months when counted altogether (and Congress was in its traditional summer recess for most of the July-August 2009 time frame).
Also remember that one of those two Independents who caucused with the Democrats was Joe Lieberman, who went his own way when it suited him and could not be relied on.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
67 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
I Know Some of You Don't Like President Obama, and Ima Let You Finish, but [View all]
MineralMan
Oct 2014
OP
Of course, it's about more than President Obama. But you wouldn't know that from the
kelliekat44
Oct 2014
#3
Then you should be more concerned with so many of them trying to distance themselves from the guy
Scootaloo
Oct 2014
#10
Yeah we can't wait to vote for David Duke. Biggest crock of bullshit I've read on DU
emulatorloo
Oct 2014
#56
In the interest of accuracy, let's be clear that there were only two short periods in 2009-2010
scarletwoman
Oct 2014
#26
Huh? Of course I don't "think voting this year is going to ring in the dawn of FDR II" - where
scarletwoman
Oct 2014
#48
Obama - I'm not on ballot “But make no mistake, these policies are on the ballot"
maced666
Oct 2014
#42
If you intend to continue posting here you might learn to say "democratic" president. I know it can
rhett o rick
Oct 2014
#25
Welcome to DU. (We're a little sensitive around here sometimes, hence the sarcasm smiley...
Stardust
Oct 2014
#33
I've been a Dem all my life, but it wasn't until DU that I became aware of the snide distinction.
Stardust
Oct 2014
#49
"I've been a Dem all my life, but it wasn't until DU that I became aware of the snide distinction."
coldean
Oct 2014
#51