# What if: Dems control 65% of congress, what would actually happen? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [September 26, 2010, 10:17am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-if-dems-control-65-of-congress-what-would-actually-happen/555082 "2010-09-26T10:17:50Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![Gozu](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gozu/32/6615_2.png) [@Gozu](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gozu)\ **Post date:** [September 26, 2010, 10:17am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-if-dems-control-65-of-congress-what-would-actually-happen/555082/1 "2010-09-26T10:17:50Z")
Clearly, Having a democrat president and a majority in both the house and senate still wasn’t enough to get a public option, a couple trillion dollars to start a second new deal to reverse the unemployment trend, enough regulation to make banking boring and less lucrative, a fixed, reasonable maximum interest rate (29.90% APR is insane) to castrate Credit card companies and other abusers, etc. etc. But what if the democrats had dreamlike legislative conditions? Say, a democrat president and 65 senate seats, 65% of congress. What do you believe would happen? Which laws would be passed and which would not? I welcome opinions from both sides, though I’m quite clearly a liberal. ---
**Author:** ![Der\_Trihs](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/der_trihs/32/233_2.png) [@Der\_Trihs](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Der_Trihs)\ **Post date:** [September 26, 2010, 10:28am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-if-dems-control-65-of-congress-what-would-actually-happen/555082/2 "2010-09-26T10:28:12Z")
Nothing would change. The Democrats are cowardly, corrupt, and conservative. They could have a 100% Democratic congress and they’d still flinch with terror at the thought of Republican accusations of being too liberal, of being “tax and spend”, or not being patriotic or religious enough.They are also the paid lackeys of the wealthy, much like the Republicans. And they have gone father and farther to the right with every year; the only reason they can be still distinguished from the Republicans the the Republicans have gone right off the deep end. ---
**Author:** ![Susanann](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/7ab992/32.png) [@Susanann](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Susanann)\ **Post date:** [September 26, 2010, 12:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-if-dems-control-65-of-congress-what-would-actually-happen/555082/3 "2010-09-26T12:09:09Z")
> [@Gozu](#): > > What if: Dems control 65% of congress, what would actually happen? Government spending would go from insane, to worse. We would go into the Greatest Depression in the history of the world. The price of gold would triple, and would then keep going up even more. ---
**Author:** ![adhay](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/ecd19e/32.png) [@adhay](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adhay)\ **Post date:** [September 26, 2010, 12:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-if-dems-control-65-of-congress-what-would-actually-happen/555082/4 "2010-09-26T12:17:38Z")
> [@Der\_Trihs](#): > > Nothing would change. The Democrats are cowardly, corrupt, and conservative. They could have a 100% Democratic congress and they’d still flinch with terror at the thought of Republican accusations of being too liberal, of being “tax and spend”, or not being patriotic or religious enough.They are also the paid lackeys of the wealthy, much like the Republicans. And they have gone father and farther to the right with every year; the only reason they can be still distinguished from the Republicans the the Republicans have gone right off the deep end. I, for one, can’t tell them apart. I have had front row center aisle seat at _The Emperor’s New Clothes: Our American Dream_ now playing at The Great American Live Theater in Washington, DC and in living rooms near year you, 24/7. This is a presentation of the Great American BS Ensemble. Cast and production crew are corrupt and self-serving assholes, running up the public debt then charging us interest on it for their own enrichment to the loss of society. Why aren’t they booed off the stage and shipped to Gitmo? The key to making this corrupt charade plausible to the people is their involvement in the drama (fear) produced with sham political, social and economic tension. Get the audience jabbering among themselves and pointing fingers at each other and the play goes on. After 8 yrs of Bush, anything looked good. So much the better that he’s black and clearly progressive. Plenty of fuel for public “debate” there. Ha ha. ---
**Author:** ![Mozart1220](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/f1d935/32.png) [@Mozart1220](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mozart1220)\ **Post date:** [September 26, 2010, 6:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-if-dems-control-65-of-congress-what-would-actually-happen/555082/5 "2010-09-26T18:52:06Z")
> [@Susanann](#): > > > [@Gozu](#): > > > > What if: Dems control 65% of congress, what would actually happen? > > Government spending would go from insane, to worse. We would go into the Greatest Depression in the history of the world. > > The price of gold would triple, and would then keep going up even more. No, he said DEMS in control, not the Reps who clearly had control for years and got us where we are today. ---
**Author:** ![Susanann](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/7ab992/32.png) [@Susanann](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Susanann)\ **Post date:** [September 26, 2010, 7:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-if-dems-control-65-of-congress-what-would-actually-happen/555082/6 "2010-09-26T19:06:57Z")
> [@Mozart1220](#): > > > [@Susanann](#): > > > > Government spending would go from insane, to worse. We would go into the Greatest Depression in the history of the world. > > > > The price of gold would triple, and would then keep going up even more. > > No, he said DEMS in control, not the Reps who clearly had control for years and got us where we are today. The Republicans were insane. The Democrats are worse. ---
**Author:** ![Der\_Trihs](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/der_trihs/32/233_2.png) [@Der\_Trihs](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Der_Trihs)\ **Post date:** [September 26, 2010, 7:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-if-dems-control-65-of-congress-what-would-actually-happen/555082/7 "2010-09-26T19:13:47Z")
> [@Susanann](#): > > > [@Mozart1220](#): > > > > No, he said DEMS in control, not the Reps who clearly had control for years and got us where we are today. > > The Republicans were insane. > > The Democrats are worse. Hardly. They’re barely anything, much less insane. Passive lumps. They don’t stand for anything, don’t try to do anything. ---
**Author:** ![Shodan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9f8e36/32.png) [@Shodan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shodan)\ **Post date:** [September 26, 2010, 7:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-if-dems-control-65-of-congress-what-would-actually-happen/555082/8 "2010-09-26T19:27:16Z")
> [@](#): > > What if: Dems control 65% of congress, what would actually happen? They would blame Republicans for preventing them from doing anything worthwhile. Regards, Shodan ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [September 26, 2010, 7:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-if-dems-control-65-of-congress-what-would-actually-happen/555082/9 "2010-09-26T19:31:01Z")
What kind of Democrats? Are they all like Denis Kucinich or are they all like \? The thing is, they’d still be answerable to the electorate, so unless the electorate changes significantly, you’re going to end up with a lot more conservative Democrats. And that is not a recipe for passing liberal or progressive legislation. ---
**Author:** ![Richard\_Parker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/35a633/32.png) [@Richard\_Parker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Richard_Parker)\ **Post date:** [September 26, 2010, 7:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-if-dems-control-65-of-congress-what-would-actually-happen/555082/10 "2010-09-26T19:44:33Z")
As one party expands and another contracts, as happened from 2006-2008 as the Democrats took over all the moderate districts, party affiliation for the expanding party becomes a poorer predictor of voting behavior, while for the other party it becomes a better predictor. That’s the simple reason that Republicans can get all 40 Senators to vote together, while the Democrats are forced to compromise internally. Republican Senators are partly responsible for obstructing things like cap-and-trade by forcing a cloture vote (for better or worse, depending on your view), but the rest of the responsibility lies with conservative voters in places like Nebraska and Arkansas to whom the center 15 or so Senators have to appeal. I assume what the OP is really asking is not what would happen if there were 65 Ben Nelsons in the Senate, and 230 Blue Dogs in the House, but what would happen if 65% of both houses was made up of people like Patty Murray and Ben Cardin – people at the center of the Democratic Party. And the answer isn’t too hard to divine. Just look at the bills submitted by these kind of Democrats who are at the center of the party. You’d probably have health care with a public option, cap-and-trade, card check, etc. > [@Shodan](#): > > > [@](#): > > > > What if: Dems control 65% of congress, what would actually happen? > > They would blame Republicans for preventing them from doing anything worthwhile. > > Regards, > Shodan The implication being that Democrats who whine about Republican obstructionism now are just deflecting. Thus, according to **Shodan** ’s view, since the GOP cannot obstruct anything as a minority, what you’ve seen in the last year is exactly what Democrats would do with 65% control of Congress. ---
**Author:** ![Der\_Trihs](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/der_trihs/32/233_2.png) [@Der\_Trihs](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Der_Trihs)\ **Post date:** [September 26, 2010, 7:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-if-dems-control-65-of-congress-what-would-actually-happen/555082/11 "2010-09-26T19:49:28Z")
> [@John\_Mace](#): > > The thing is, they’d still be answerable to the electorate, so unless the electorate changes significantly, you’re going to end up with a lot more conservative Democrats. And that is not a recipe for passing liberal or progressive legislation. I disagree. They are already voting more conservatively than the electorate. It doesn’t matter that the majority of the public supported some form of single payer health care; that was never seriously considered. The opinions, needs and desires of the electorate matter very little to them. ---
**Author:** ![Richard\_Parker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/35a633/32.png) [@Richard\_Parker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Richard_Parker)\ **Post date:** [September 26, 2010, 7:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-if-dems-control-65-of-congress-what-would-actually-happen/555082/12 "2010-09-26T19:53:44Z")
> [@Der\_Trihs](#): > > They are already voting more conservatively than the electorate. It doesn’t matter that the majority of the public supported some form of single payer health care; that was never seriously considered. The opinions, needs and desires of the electorate matter very little to them. Baloney. The question is whether the majority of the likely voters in the States represented by Senators 55-60 supported single payer. I’ve seen no credible evidence that that was true. Indeed, I doubt a majority of Americans could even explain what single payer health care is. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [September 26, 2010, 8:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-if-dems-control-65-of-congress-what-would-actually-happen/555082/13 "2010-09-26T20:10:47Z")
> [@Richard\_Parker](#): > > > [@Der\_Trihs](#): > > > > They are already voting more conservatively than the electorate. It doesn’t matter that the majority of the public supported some form of single payer health care; that was never seriously considered. The opinions, needs and desires of the electorate matter very little to them. > > Baloney. The question is whether the majority of the likely voters in the States represented by Senators 55-60 supported single payer. I’ve seen no credible evidence that that was true. Indeed, I doubt a majority of Americans could even explain what single payer health care is. It’s not even true that most Americans support it. Michael Moore made that claim about a year ago, and [here is a good debunking of it at PolitiFact.com.](http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2009/oct/01/michael-moore/michael-moore-claims-majority-favor-single-payer-h/) ---
**Author:** ![Gozu](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gozu/32/6615_2.png) [@Gozu](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gozu)\ **Post date:** [September 26, 2010, 8:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-if-dems-control-65-of-congress-what-would-actually-happen/555082/14 "2010-09-26T20:17:11Z")
> [@John\_Mace](#): > > What kind of Democrats? Are they all like Denis Kucinich or are they all like \? Good question. I meant the same kind of mix we actually have. Some blue dogs, some centrists and some liberals in the same proportions persent today. ---
**Author:** ![Der\_Trihs](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/der_trihs/32/233_2.png) [@Der\_Trihs](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Der_Trihs)\ **Post date:** [September 26, 2010, 8:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-if-dems-control-65-of-congress-what-would-actually-happen/555082/15 "2010-09-26T20:23:17Z")
> [@John\_Mace](#): > > > [@Richard\_Parker](#): > > > > Baloney. The question is whether the majority of the likely voters in the States represented by Senators 55-60 supported single payer. I’ve seen no credible evidence that that was true. Indeed, I doubt a majority of Americans could even explain what single payer health care is. > > It’s not even true that most Americans support it. Michael Moore made that claim about a year ago, and [here is a good debunking of it at PolitiFact.com.](http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2009/oct/01/michael-moore/michael-moore-claims-majority-favor-single-payer-h/) “Micheal Moore”? Most of the polls I’ve seen say they do. I’ve never heard nor cared about Moore’s opinion. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [September 26, 2010, 8:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-if-dems-control-65-of-congress-what-would-actually-happen/555082/16 "2010-09-26T20:27:23Z")
> [@Der\_Trihs](#): > > > [@John\_Mace](#): > > > > It’s not even true that most Americans support it. Michael Moore made that claim about a year ago, and [here is a good debunking of it at PolitiFact.com.](http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2009/oct/01/michael-moore/michael-moore-claims-majority-favor-single-payer-h/) > > “Micheal Moore”? Most of the polls I’ve seen say they do. I’ve never heard nor cared about Moore’s opinion. His opinion was the same as yours. And my cite debunks that opinion that you share with him. ---
**Author:** ![adhay](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/ecd19e/32.png) [@adhay](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adhay)\ **Post date:** [September 26, 2010, 8:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-if-dems-control-65-of-congress-what-would-actually-happen/555082/17 "2010-09-26T20:38:24Z")
> [@Mozart1220](#): > > No, he said DEMS in control, not the Reps who clearly had control for years and got us where we are today. See what I mean? DEMS/Reps, what’s the diff? When has wealth (capital) not held sway, anywhere? A little US history. We are the prodigy of Britain, prodigy of Rome … . More wealth for the wealthy … bread, circuses and, at last, Dancing With The Stars for the people. The 13 Original Oligarchies were British chartered. They were about evenly divided into Northern/Southern Capital, NC/SC. NC did trade and manufacturing on the backs of slave wage women and children and immigrants certified (by the British Crown) as indentured servants. NC could point to SC slaves and make the Northern poor realize how lucky they were to be working for nothing as free people and patriotically sign up for preserving the Union of NC. SC did agriculture on the backs of outright slaves and poor white tenants/trash/overseers. Just as long as they weren’t n_s, the Southern poor would report uppity n_s and patriotically march off to war for SC to establish the Confederacy of SC. Ingenious. The War Of Northern Aggression proved that Guns, Germs and Steel will out. It is, today, Our Constitutional Blueprint. Look around, folks. ---
**Author:** ![Lobohan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lobohan/32/79_2.png) [@Lobohan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lobohan)\ **Post date:** [September 26, 2010, 8:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-if-dems-control-65-of-congress-what-would-actually-happen/555082/18 "2010-09-26T20:49:04Z")
> [@Richard\_Parker](#): > > As one party expands and another contracts, as happened from 2006-2008 as the Democrats took over all the moderate districts, party affiliation for the expanding party becomes a poorer predictor of voting behavior, while for the other party it becomes a better predictor. That’s the simple reason that Republicans can get all 40 Senators to vote together, while the Democrats are forced to compromise internally. Republican Senators are partly responsible for obstructing things like cap-and-trade by forcing a cloture vote (for better or worse, depending on your view), but the rest of the responsibility lies with conservative voters in places like Nebraska and Arkansas to whom the center 15 or so Senators have to appeal. > > I assume what the OP is really asking is not what would happen if there were 65 Ben Nelsons in the Senate, and 230 Blue Dogs in the House, but what would happen if 65% of both houses was made up of people like Patty Murray and Ben Cardin – people at the center of the Democratic Party. And the answer isn’t too hard to divine. Just look at the bills submitted by these kind of Democrats who are at the center of the party. You’d probably have health care with a public option, cap-and-trade, card check, etc. > > > [@Shodan](#): > > > > They would blame Republicans for preventing them from doing anything worthwhile. > > > > Regards, > > Shodan > > The implication being that Democrats who whine about Republican obstructionism now are just deflecting. Thus, according to **Shodan** ’s view, since the GOP cannot obstruct anything as a minority, what you’ve seen in the last year is exactly what Democrats would do with 65% control of Congress. The only possible way to interpret Shodan’s comment is that he simply doesn’t understand how the Senate works. ---
**Author:** ![Der\_Trihs](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/der_trihs/32/233_2.png) [@Der\_Trihs](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Der_Trihs)\ **Post date:** [September 26, 2010, 9:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-if-dems-control-65-of-congress-what-would-actually-happen/555082/19 "2010-09-26T21:56:25Z")
> [@John\_Mace](#): > > > [@Der\_Trihs](#): > > > > “Micheal Moore”? Most of the polls I’ve seen say they do. I’ve never heard nor cared about Moore’s opinion. > > His opinion was the same as yours. And my cite debunks that opinion that you share with him. Hardly. Besides the fact that it cites a Rasmussen poll, someone known for a conservative bias, it appears to be more nitpicking over political tactics. Support for single payer as long as you don’t use the words “single payer”, is still support. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [September 26, 2010, 10:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-if-dems-control-65-of-congress-what-would-actually-happen/555082/20 "2010-09-26T22:04:08Z")
> [@Der\_Trihs](#): > > > [@John\_Mace](#): > > > > His opinion was the same as yours. And my cite debunks that opinion that you share with him. > > Hardly. Besides the fact that it cites a Rasmussen poll, someone known for a conservative bias, it appears to be more nitpicking over political tactics. Support for single payer as long as you don’t use the words “single payer”, is still support. Hardly back at ya. The Rasmussen poll is just one that it cites. You could delete that part, and the it’s still debunked. Here’s the major conclusion: > [@](#): > > A fair reading of recent polls just doesn’t support Moore’s claim, Bowman said. “He’s wrong.” > > We have a few problems with Moore’s claim. First, he cherry-picked the results from a July Kaiser poll. There have been five other Kaiser polls since last December, including two since July, that asked that exact same question, and only the July results showed a majority, slightly over 50 percent. > > But our bigger problem is that in the same Kaiser poll, people were much more supportive of plans that largely kept intact the private insurance model. [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-if-dems-control-65-of-congress-what-would-actually-happen/555082.md?page=2)