GOP Leadership Planning Lame-Duck Congress: A Sneak Attack on Our Future

I got this in the mail from a newsletter I'm subscribed to concerning world trade and fair trade issues.

Global Trade Watch Launches LameDuckHunt.org Blog

Dear John,

It should be against the law, but it isn't... yet. But that's the kind of sneak attack that President George W. Bush, Speaker Dennis Hastert, GOP House Majority Leader John Boehner and NRCC Chair Tom Reynolds' are planning for November and December.

Confronted with the likely loss of one or both congressional chambers in the 2006 midterm elections, the GOP leadership seems determined to hoist one final raspberry to public accountability by calling for a rump session of this Congress after the election to vote on harmful legislation they did not bring up earlier because it would have cost the GOP the election! This plan for a lame-duck congress would be the GOP's "screw you" finale to the American electorate.

Global Trade Watch, in cooperation with several other organizations that are concerned about the lame duck session, has launched Lame Duck Hunt, a new blog in which we will be keeping watch on the lame-duck congress with a special eye towards the Peru "free trade" agreement (if you haven't taken action yet on this super-controversial NAFTA expansion, please do so now!).

What other sorts of legislative toxic waste is planned for approval in the lame duck? How about another misguided attempt to allow drilling in the Artic? Or a plan to give oil companies tax incentives to increase environmentally destructive offshore oil drilling? Or a deal to expand unmonitored nuclear programs abroad? Or an attack on "net neutrality" that would give big telecom corporations more control over the Internet? These are just some of the poisonous bills being lined up for the lame duck in willful disregard of the public interest.

There's a reason that Hastert, Bush and company didn't bring up these harmful bills before the November elections: because the policies they want to make into law are rejected by the majority of voters in this country! These bills are harmful whenever they are brought up. Anticipating the changes this election will bring, Bush, Hastert and company are using this as their last chance to deliver on legislation they promised their corporate buddies.

Visit and participate in LameDuckHunt.org as we track the lame-duck session — before, during and after it actually happens — so we can work together to stop some of the nastiness that could come out of it if we're not paying attention!

Check out LameDuckHunt.org to keep track of what unsavory things Congress is planning to do when they are least accountable to us.

No One Will Win the Senate

Practically speaking, a party does not "win" the Senate unless it has sixty votes, i.e. enough votes to prevail on a cloture vote, i.e. to end debate on a bill and overcome a filibuster. Let's be real here. The Republicans have not been "winning" in the Senate at any time during Bush's reign because the Republicans have never had sixty votes. Even if the Democrats move to 51 seats in the Senate, they will be far from overcoming Republican truculence in the form of refusing to end debate on a bill. It is really only with respect to amendments that a plain majority (51 votes) is worth anything in the Senate. Even when it comes to judicial appointments, the proponent of the appointee needs sixty votes to end debate/block a filibuster.

My predicition: the Senate will break down 50/50. Yet, every single seat that the Dems pick up will still be extremely significant. Realize this: the Dems have for some time been one or two votes away from passing important amendments, e.g. the Specter amendment requiring habeas corpus in the detainee bill. This amendment needed two more yeas to pass.

Also, note this: if Chafee loses to a Dem in Rhode Island, the Dems don't really pick up a vote.

Dems Now Have the Edge

According to the traders in the Iowa Electronic Market, the Democrats are now more likely to take the House than are the Republicans. At the same time, it is becoming increasingly clear that this race is UP IN THE AIR. Options traders are willing to pay $.35 for the right to win a dollar in the event that the Democrats take the house (with Repubs maintaining the Senate). A Republican majority in both Houses is going for $.32. Meanwhile, there is quite a jump in the likelihood of the Dems taking BOTH houses, with traders willing to pay $.26 for that contingency, the highest amount since August.

The Dem numbers jumped on weekend news highlighting the North Korean nuke test and the flailing Foley scandal.

Congressional Election Predictions

The most accurate prediction of how the House and Senate will shake out during the 2006 Election is produced by the Iowa Electronic Option system. This virtual trading pit allows users to place a certain amount of money, between $.00 and $.99, on the outcome of the election. You can offer up to a dollar to win the right to a dollar, depending on which outcome you have selected. The choices are based on the four potential outcomes of the election:

Republican House, Republican Senate ($.436)
Non-Republican House, Republican Senate ($.330)
Non-Republican House, Non-Republican Senate ($.205)
Republican House, Non-Republican Senate ($.033)

And I have listed how much a person is willing to pay in order to win a dollar based on each outcome. Right now, it is most likely that the Repubs will keep both Houses. The second most likely outcome is the Democrats taking the House but not the Senate.

There have been times when the options trader were paying more to see a Deomcrat Senate/ Republican House outcome, most recently September 11th, but not since then.

These prices probably do not yet reflect the reaction to North Korea's nuclear test.