REVIEW & OUTLOOK
Daschle's Election Lesson
Do Democrats know why they lost the Senate majority?
So much for the theory that Democrats lost the Senate in November because they had obstructed President Bush's agenda. Judging by Tom Daschle's behavior so far this year, the new Senate minority leader has concluded that the lesson of their drubbing is that Democrats weren't obstructionist enough.
Only a week into the new Congress, the Daschle Democrats are already in full-throated opposition, assailing every White House idea and starting up the 2004 election campaign. Mr. Daschle's response to the President's tax cut hasn't been merely that it's wrong or helps "the rich," but that it's "obscene." (Tom, what are you going to say when you really don't like something?)
Democrats are also already vowing to defeat Mr. Bush's judicial nominees, even if it takes filibusters that let a mere 41 Democrats define Senate "advice and consent." Yesterday Mr. Daschle said the renomination of Charles Pickering Sr. "lays bare the Administration's real position on civil rights" and "exposes the Southern strategy clearly." Ah, racial harmony.
This same goodwill embrace is also being extended to new GOP Majority Leader Bill Frist. Despite a bipartisan deal last week to pass unemployment benefits by unanimous consent, Democrats sandbagged Mr. Frist on the floor by demanding more cash than the deal had called for. Hillary Clinton was seen giving orders on this ambush on the Senate floor. While the original deal ultimately passed, the vote was an omen of the Democratic strategy.
Which seems to be to use at every opportunity to delay by bollixing up the Senate works. That includes even delaying the handover of their majority status. Every new Congress requires "organizing resolutions," but Democrats have threatened to filibuster the Senate version unless they get virtually the same committee and staff funding as the majority.
Some of this haggling is understandable, but the demand for 50/50 funding is absurd. The historical split has typically been two-thirds/one-third regardless of the Senate breakdown. Last Congress's division of 55/45 was the exception, because it began with the parties split 50/50, and Democrats only got to 51 midterm after Jim Jeffords defected to get a committee chair. Republicans have now won an election, and Democrats know the majority needs more funding because it has the duty of actually running the Senate.
Conveniently, any organizing delay allows Democrats to continue as committee chairmen, slowing the Republican start. Joe Lieberman, who is supposed to be the former chairman of Governmental Affairs, sent out a notice saying that he'd preside over this week's confirmation hearing for Tom Ridge, nominated to run the new Homeland Security Department.
This would mean a nice photo-op for the soon-to-be Presidential candidate, but it's an insult to Maine Republican Susan Collins, who should be running the committee. The White House pulled Mr. Ridge at the last minute to deny Mr. Lieberman his chance to knock the Administration around, but this only delays Mr. Ridge's ability to get on with the job.
No doubt the Senate will organize, but the shenanigans portend a nasty two years. Democrats are understandably sore about losing their majority, but rather than undertake some introspection they're jumping right back to the barricades. They apparently figure they can obstruct Mr. Bush's agenda and voters will blame Republicans who are supposed to be in control.
Maybe, but we seem to recall that's similar to the argument they made last year. Max Cleland and Jean Carnahan can testify from private life to how well it worked.
