The last time we had a Senate divided at 50/50 was back in 2001. It only stayed that way until May of 2001 when Vermont Republican Sen. Jim Jeffords switched parties, giving Democrats 51 seats.
The last time we had a Senate divided at 50/50 was back in 2001. It only stayed that way until May of 2001 when Vermont Republican Sen. Jim Jeffords switched parties, giving Democrats 51 seats.
But, the make-up of the Senate was much less polarized than it is today. In 2001, 30 senators 10 Republicans and 20 Democrats represented a state that voted for the other party s presidential nominee. There were blue-state Republicans like Senators Lincoln Chafee of Rhode Island and Peter Fitzgerald of Illinois, and red-state Democrats like Senators Ben Nelson of Nebraska and Fritz Hollings of South Carolina. Today, just six senators three Republican and three Democrats sit in a state where their party s nominee for president did not win. In other words, 20 years ago, many more senators had a political incentive to work with the opposite party. In fact, when President Bush passed the 2001 tax bill through reconciliation, 12 Democrats voted for it and two Republicans voted agains
Just over a month ago, we discussed a strategy that President Donald Trump unfortunately never utilized before vacating the White House: Sending the Paris Climate Accord to the Senate for rejection. After all, Article II, Section 2 of the Constitution stipulates, â[The president] shall have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, to make Treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur.â
Trumpâs predecessor, Barack Obama, the man responsible for this reckless pipe dream, slyly abrogated his constitutional responsibility by not sending the accord to the Senate for ratification â with the help of a few Republicans, we might add. In fact, Matt Margolis of PJ Media points out, âObama, who fancied himself a constitutional scholar, never even attempted to go to the Senate for ratification. Instead, he avoided referring to the agreement as a treaty publicly, in order to argue that Senate ratification wasnât constitutionally m