TODAY THE WORLD CHANGED—DID YOU NOTICE?
Sometimes earth shattering happenings are (in newspaper talk) buried below the fold. That is, they are not recognized for their world-changing importance. This will undoubtedly be the case today. One story will receive far less coverage than a murder in Kansas or a carjacking in Oregon. But, in terms of importance, today could rank up there with the day TARP was rejected, the day that TARP passed, or the day that a Republican Supreme Court Justice voted to uphold Obamacare.
Today, the news broke that the US Senate changed its rules. Sounds boring, right? No it definitely is not. Rather, today’s Senate action is clearly one of the most important occurrences of this decade.
From now on, all federal executive and judicial appointments (except for Supreme Court nominees) can move forward with only 51 Senate votes. Yesterday that number was 60—a big difference from 51. But, after today, President Obama–and all of his successors, both R’s and D’s—will find it vastly easier to have their appointments approved.
This Senate rule change is a sign of the times. As Sentor Reid pointed out, Presidential appointments have been blocked 168 times in US history. Half of these have occurred with Obama as President. It is part of the R’s “block and cause trouble” strategy, designed to frustrate Obama’s programs. But that strategy has now led to the rule change, and our country (for better of for worse) will never be the same again.
While the direct effect of the rule change is to make the appointment process easier, there are other—equally important—consequences down the road.
1. If Janet Yellen’s confirmation had ever been in doubt, it is no longer.
2. While legislation and Supreme Court appointments still need 60 votes to proceed, THE PRECEDENT HAS BEEN SET. In the future, if Supreme Court candidates or important legislation is frustrated by a Senate minority, further rule changes can be made to allow for majority control—whether that majority be D as it is now, or R in the future.
Think of what this would have meant in 2008-2009. The Democratically controlled House passed substantial environmental and social justice legislation. Because of the 60 vote requirement, most of these did not pass the Senate. If there was only a 51 vote requirement, many of these social justice programs would likely have become law.
Similarly, in 2004, Republicans controlled both the White House and Senate. Many conservative measures were not pushed hard nor enacted because the 60 vote barrier was impossible to overcome.
In the future, either party will feel freer to change the rules, and eliminate the 60 vote barrier to legislation.
3. Importantly, the Senate rule change also does not bode well for the upcoming Budget talks and debt ceiling showdowns. If there was animosity before, the Senate vote will ratch it up another notch—or maybe 2 or 3. Hopes for a small bargain, or perhaps even a grand bargain, have just taken a big hit.
In sum, the Senate rule change is really important. So read about it and try to understand how it could effect your portfolio. For it is clearly one of the most momentous occurrences so far this decade.
Follow me on Twitter @USKOTM.