The Unz Review • An Alternative Media Selection$
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 BlogviewTed Rall Archive
Biden and the Democrats Could Change Everything. But They Won't Try.
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information


Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • B
Show CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Thanks, LOL, or Troll with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used three times during any eight hour period.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

“When someone shows you who they are,” Maya Angelou said, “believe them the first time.” We’re about to be reminded who and what the corporate-owned Democratic Party is — something it showed us in 2009.

A pair of upset victories in the widely watched pair of Georgia senatorial runoff elections has handed Democrats what they said they needed to get big things done: control of the White House, the House of Representatives and the U.S. Senate. If they want, they have argued over the last year, they will be able to push through a lot of important legislation on the liberal agenda: a dramatic increase in the minimum wage, student loan forgiveness, an eviction ban, “Medicare for All,” expanded economic stimulus and addressing the climate crisis come to mind.

They don’t want to. They won’t try.

And they’ll have an excuse. Democrats will still be 10 votes short of the supermajority needed to override Republican filibusters. The billion dollars spent to elect those two Democrats in Georgia created some interesting symbolism about the rising influence of Black voters and hopes for further Democratic inroads in the South, but it didn’t defang Sen. Mitch McConnell. Gridlock goes on.

Not that Biden and his pet Democratic Congress have much of an agenda. He’ll reverse President Donald Trump’s executive orders on stuff like rejoining the Paris climate agreement, but he won’t move the policy meter left of where it stood under former President Barack Obama — a guy who was so far right of progressives that they launched the Occupy Wall Street movement to oppose him. Biden campaigned tepidly on adding a “public option” to Obamacare, but McConnell will almost certainly block it and anything else that requires GOP votes. The exception, of course, will be the next bloated military spending bill. For six consecutive decades, Americans have been able to count on death, taxes, rising income inequality and bipartisan support for blowing up brown people in countries we can’t find on a map with \$640 toilet seats.

But you shouldn’t let the filibuster get you down. Even if Nonexistent God were to smite 10 deserving GOP senators with the coronaplague and said smitten senators represented states whose Democratic governors were to appoint their replacements, thus giving the Bidenocrats a coveted 60-vote supermajority, nothing would get better .

We know this because it happened 12 years ago during the 111th Congress.


Obama’s presidency began in the strongest power position of any Democrat since Franklin D. Roosevelt. With the economy in a tailspin and shedding hundreds of thousands of jobs a month — back then, we still thought that was a lot — voters were both desperate and optimistic that our new, young leader would lead us out of the Great Recession. He had a 68% approval rating, indicating bipartisan support. Democrats had picked up 21 seats in the House, giving them a 257-178 majority. They had a 59-41 majority in the Senate. (This included two independents, Bernie Sanders and Joe Lieberman, who caucused with Democrats.) They were one tantalizing vote short of a supermajority.

That changed on Sept. 24, 2009, when the seat vacated by Ted Kennedy’s death was temporarily filled by a fellow Democrat, until Feb. 4, 2010, when the Republican governor of Massachusetts violated all that is good and decent by placing Republican Scott Brown in the Kennedy spot.

Democratic apologists explain away Obama’s lack of progress on progressive policy goals during that halcyon period by pointing out that total Democratic control of the White House and both houses of Congress “only” lasted four months, during which they passed the Affordable Care Act.

Let’s temporarily set aside the question of how it is that former President Ronald Reagan rammed an agenda so far right that it still affects all of us today through a 243-191 Democratic House and “just” 53 GOP seats in the Senate. What about those four magic months during which Obama could have gone as far left as he and his fellow Democrats wanted?

Well, Democrats did pass one of those 60 straight bloated defense bills. That would have happened under Reagan or former President George W. Bush. They extended unemployment benefits by 14 to 20 weeks, depending on in which state the poor jobless schmuck lived. And the ACA. And that’s it.

In order to secure the vote of Lieberman — who represented the insurance company-owned state of Connecticut — the ACA did not include the “public option” that Obama had promised during his campaign. Then-Democratic National Committee Chairman Howard Dean, then in his pre-neutered state, called the deletion of the public option “the collapse of health care reform in the United States Senate” and added, “honestly, the best thing to do right now is kill the Senate bill and go back to the House and start the reconciliation process, where you only need 51 votes and it would be a much simpler bill.” He was right, but Obama, his House and his supermajoritarian Senate didn’t bother. Like Lieberman, they cared about insurers, not patients.

Four months isn’t that long. Yet Reagan used less time than that to crush his opponents and pass tax cuts for the rich that shredded the New Deal social safety net. Former President Lyndon Johnson took less time to “set Congress on the path to passing the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as well as a tax cut and Medicare,” wrote presidential scholar Jeffrey Tulis. FDR created modern liberalism in under three months. You can imagine what Trump would have done during four months of a GOP House and Senate supermajority.

Republicans didn’t prevent Obama from taking on the minimum wage or student loan debt or poverty. Obama had four months to do those things. No one could have stopped him. He didn’t try.

And neither will Biden given the chance.

• Category: Ideology • Tags: 2020 Election, Democratic Party, Joe Biden 
Hide 12 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
  1. Thanks, but we know what they’re NOT. Question: will there be life in or outside of the box ?

    The corporate body has got your number. You vote for your number. Any man forgets his number spends a night in the box.

    These COVID masks you keep with you. Any man loses his mask spends a night in the box.

    You got questions, you look to your number for order. Any man don’t want order gets a …

  2. El Dato says:

    FDR created modern liberalism in under three months.

    How much rewriting of history can one perform in 1 sentence.

    • Agree: Verymuchalive
  3. Democrats will still be 10 votes short of the supermajority needed to override Republican filibusters.

    It it is any consolation, the Filibuster rule is one that can easily be changed or eliminated altogether. It is a tradition, not a Constitutional requirement.

    • Replies: @VivaLaMigra
  4. Not to worry: Klaus Schwab and Bill Gates will change everything for them.

  5. BuelahMan says:

    I wonder if Ted Rall hates white people as much as Maya Angelou did?

  6. Cletus says:

    Not that it matters to your argument, but your history is wrong on the Senate in 2009/2010.

    The Dems had 60 seats after the Nov 2008 elections. Kennedy died and was replaced temporarily by another Democrat. Then Scott Brown won a special election to make it 59-41, not by appointment by the governor. Needless to say, the election of a Republican senator in Mass was a big deal at the time.

    • Replies: @Greta Handel
    , @VivaLaMigra
  7. Cletus says:

    I’ll add that your basic point is correct, there will be nothing from the progressive economic wish list getting passed.

    For example, the ruling class doesn’t stay wealthy by raising taxes on themselves. My civ-nat buddies complain that the Dems will raise taxes like crazy now. I laugh and point out that they had full control (60 Senate seats!) for about 11 months in 2009-2010 and didn’t touch income taxes.

  8. @Cletus

    Mr. Rall can now either defend or correct his assertion.

    He will, won’t he?

  9. Republicans didn’t prevent Obama from taking on the minimum wage

    The minimum wage should be \$75/hr for immigrants, union members, and cartoonists.

    or student loan debt or poverty.

    Academia is the most corrupt industry in the land. Universities are expensive scams. And look at how their towns and counties vote!

  10. Um, neither a “Republican governor, nor any other kind of governor, “placed Scott Brown” in the Senate seat on Feb 4, 2010. There was a special election in late January. And, point of fact, the MA governor at that time was a Democratic moonbat, Patrick Deval. Dem’s in MA had actually shot themselves in the foot by CHANGING state law on filling Senate vacancies. Fearing the presence of a Republican in the State House’s “corner office,” the law was changed to require a special election, instead of having an appointee of the then-sitting governor fill out the entire remaining term for a Senate seat. Thus, Patrick’s temporary appointee couldn’t serve ’til January, 2013, as would previously have been the case. The MA Democratic Machine was confident that there were enough moonbats in the state to easily elect anyone on the ballot with a “D” after one’s name. Well, Scott Brown got out and campaigned; the Dem candidate didn’t. BTW, do you bother fact-checking ANY of your drivel? You are aware, for example, that the Senate Dem’s will eliminate the filibuster, completely destroying the underlying narrative of your piece, right?

  11. @Cletus

    Yeah, I laid out the details in another post. You’d think before posting his pompous, all-knowing piece, this guy would have done some basic fact-checking. But, since when have facts mattered to moonbats?

  12. @The Alarmist

    The “filibuster” thing is just another “McGuffin” – along with the falsehood of a Republican MA governor in MA in the early winter of 2010 appointing a Republican to a vacant US Senate seat, that this idiot put in his piece to bolster a case that couldn’t be supported with facts. The filibuster is going the way of the dodo bird, ‘cuz it’s “anti-democratic.” Or, should I say more accurately, “anti-Democrat?” And, I’d say that falsehood matters a great deal to his phony argument, which seems to have the aim of tamping down fears of what Dementia Joe’s handlers intend to do. It’s a “Don’t Worry; the Dem’s won’t do that crazy stuff and they couldn’t if they wanted to.”

Current Commenter

Leave a Reply - Comments on articles more than two weeks old will be judged much more strictly on quality and tone

 Remember My InformationWhy?
 Email Replies to my Comment
Submitted comments have been licensed to The Unz Review and may be republished elsewhere at the sole discretion of the latter
Commenting Disabled While in Translation Mode
Subscribe to This Comment Thread via RSS Subscribe to All Ted Rall Comments via RSS
Analyzing the History of a Controversial Movement
The Shaping Event of Our Modern World
The Surprising Elements of Talmudic Judaism