This is a question I feel dumb for not knowing. But I realize I don’t know the answer for sure.
Is there any practical difference between when the senate is split 50-50 from when it is 51-49 or greater? The VP will cast any tie votes but is not there for all the workings of the senate. Does the majority party have less power when it’s 50-50? Are procedures different at all? I remember in the beginning of this term there was talk of a power sharing agreement but what does that mean in layman’s terms?
My understanding is that there’s very little practical difference, and what there is is mostly in the allocation of seats on committees, which are (more?) evenly divided.
But even that is based on history. In theory there’s nothing stopping the 50 seat majority party from changing the rules and taking all power to themselves, using the VP as a tie breaker. But the way it’s been done is that there’s been some sort of minor power sharing accommodation, and no real motivation to take that away since it doesn’t count for much in the end anyway.
Yes there’s always the nuclear option to change the rules in your favor as much as the constitution allows. Then you better hope you will always be the majority party.
This is the kind of thing I’m wondering about. More evenly divided committees may lead to bills getting bogged down before they come up for votes.
The first thing the newly formed committee does is elect a chair, by majority vote, no debate.
The chair does not vote.
A quick Google of two committees, Intelligence and Judiciary, shows an equal number of members from both parties.
So it seems to me a 50-50 senate committee is automatically balanced in favor of the minority party, the one without the VP, since the chairman is from the majority party.
But I find this which suggests the chairman does vote:
Third, Section 3(1)(A) of S. Res 27 provides that tie-votes in Senate Committees will be reported to the full Senate for further consideration:
(“If a committee has not reported out a measure or matter because of a tie vote, then—(A) the Chairman of the committee shall transmit a notice of a tie vote to the Secretary of the Senate and such notice shall be printed in the Record;… .”)
Editor’s Note : Here is another step in the process: tie-vote bills essentially go into a “holding pen” in the Senate as another process starts to consider the tie-vote bill.
Fourth, Section 3(1)(B) of S. Res 27 allows either the Majority Leader (Schumer) or Minority Leader (McConnell) to call the tie-vote bill up from the “holding pen” for debate before the full Senate to determine whether to later bring the bill before the Senate for a full Floor vote (a vote to decide whether to have a vote). However, debate on the bill at this stage (in the “holding pen”) would be limited to only four hours:
This isn’t true, senate committee chairs have the same vote as any other member of the committee. What the Senate agreed to this session is that committee membership will be split 50-50 between the parties, with Democrats holding the Chairmanships. As you noted, in the event of a tie, there is a process to allow the bill/nomination to proceed to the floor.
OK, thanks, this was the piece I didn’t find - makes sense or else the minority party would always be the committee majority.
The interesting wrinkle is that either party can call the bill to the floor of the full senate (from the “holding pen”) in the event of a tie. This means that unlike the previous session, the Minority Leader can also force a debate/vote on a bill. I do note this is only a vote on whether to have a real vote on the bill later, so i presume that the Majority Leader can still set the agenda on when if ever the bill is actually voted on; like McConnell did in the previous session, preventing items from coming to an actual vote.
I’m wondering if this is because the VP rarely presides over the body and so a junior member is typically called on to preside. Since as the presiding officer they would have no vote, if a Dem is the Acting President the Pubs would have a 50/49 majority. This rule would mean things stay consistent no matter who is the presiding officer and we all know the Senate loves consistency