• chiliedogg@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    1 year ago

    That’s not really true.

    Al Franken was dealing with a runoff and legal challenges and wasn’t seated until July 7th 2009, bringing the roster of the Senate to 58 Dems and 2 independens who voted with them. They finally had the supermajority a year and a half into Obama’s first term - but not really even then.

    Ted Kennedy was on medical absence from the Senate from June 9th 2009 until his death in August, so they didn’t have the votes to kill a fillibuster. It wasn’t until September 24th that an temporary appointee filled the seat until the special election won by the Tea Party on January 10th.

    The Senate met on a total of 65 days in which Obama had a supermajority.

    • flop@lemmy.fmhy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      That’s not exactly right either

      Now the Democrats had a safe majority in the House and a filibuster-proof supermajority of 60 in the Senate. That scenario lasted only four months before fate intervened. Sen. Ted Kennedy of Massachusetts died on August 25, 2009, leaving the Democrats, once again, with 59 seats (counting the two Independents). Exactly one month later, on September 25, Democrat Paul Kirk was appointed interim senator from Massachusetts to serve until the special election set for January 19, 2010 – once again giving the Democrats that 60th vote. But the intrigue was just beginning.

      With the supermajority vote safely intact once again, the Senate moved rather quickly to pass the ACA – or ObamaCare – on Christmas Eve 2009 in a 60 – 39 vote (Kentucky Republican Senator Jim Bunning chose not to vote since he was not running for reelection). The House had previously passed a similar, although not identical bill on November 7, 2009, on a 220 – 215 vote. One Republican voted “aye,” and 39 Democrats were against.

      So even starting with a republican inspired corporate funding healthcare bill, scrapping single payer and still not getting a single republican vote, and only passing on a tenuous super majority.

      I will grant you that they tried, and many probably had good intentions, but I think it’s important to realize that the democrats had very little opportunity and in that window couldn’t succeed in getting us even close to other industrialized nations healthcare outcomes. They seem to have an apparent unwillingness to actual contend with the issues they are legislating, and fail to utilize political power and strategy in ways that will actually solve problems.

      We see this today with the supreme court. The Heroes act allows for complete waving of student loan debt, without application by the debtor, completely within the authority of secretary of education. Rather than swiftly, and decidedly removing debt, they build a means tested website that came online months after they announced it, was forced to pause because of predictable court cases brought against it, waited as it was push through a blatantly packed court system, and ultimately died to a disgustingly corrupt supreme court that allowed a state to claim standing for a company without their knowledge, and claimed that ‘modify’ doesn’t mean to reduce by 10k.

      I vote democrat because might as well, but I really wish people wouldn’t come on here pretending they just have had to struggle their whole way through the system when it is their own incompetence, arrogance, passivity, and failure that leads to the constant roadblocks to their effectiveness.

    • Phlogiston@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      One of the problems with inexperienced folks is they don’t viscerally understand these sorts of issues. To them they voted a dem into the presidency and everything is just supposed to happen while they fuck off and do nothing until the next presidential election. Later they start to realize that they have to vote every couple of years, maybe, but it takes even more time and attention before they see the nuances of slim majorities and fillibusters and all that.