What does holding a Majority vs. a Minority means apart from the Obvious?

[FrenchieCat]

Most of us know that being in the Majority means your party has more votes,
but what other advantages does being in the Majority bring?


Thanks!

[brand404]

1. Lobbyist Money...lots and lots of it.

[FrenchieCat]

4. There are differences in how the agenda is set, is that correct?

If so, do you know how the agenda in congress is set?

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

57. Not entirely true.

Most lobbyists will donate to both sides in a campaign, as a "just in case". The percentages skew slightly depending on who is in power, but not as much as you'd think.

[depakid]

2. Best alternative, given that unlike Republicans, Democrats proved utterly incompetent as opposition

party.

[FrenchieCat]

6. So what is the difference in being the majority party vs. the minority party?

cause you response doesn't provide an answer to my specific question. :shrug:

[depakid]

10. Not much, as we have seen. Some pet legislation and half measures pass that otherwise wouldn't

But the bottom line is that it's not Republicans running totally roughshod.

And really that's the Democrats ONLY solid argument at this point, going into the election cycle.

"We're not Republicans."

[FrenchieCat]

18. So let me ask you this; if the President wants more unemployment benefits passed,

and the Republicans are in the majority, say in the Senate, can they just refuse to bring such a bill onto the floor, thereby not allowing the Senate to even vote on such a bill?

[depakid]

24. Since the administration and Congress has acquiesced and handed minority 60 vote power to the Senate

on damn near anything considered, It doesn't make a whole lot of difference.

Now, if the "leadership" wasn't too timid and complicit to use aggressive parliamentary maneuvers and play hardball like Republicans do when they hold power, it might be a different story.

[FrenchieCat]

29. So let me ask you this? If the Senate would have been a Republican Majority,

would the stimulus bill been passed? Would it have even gone to the floor for a vote. Would the Committees even have taken it up?

[depakid]

36. Maybe, maybe not- who can say how it would have played out over the course of time

My thoughts are that Dean's words from last summer and fall are prescient:

Parties either use their majority- or they lose it; and

We didn't elect Democrats to pass crap legislation.

[FrenchieCat]

37. I understand that you want to make a statement,

but I'm asking for some procedural facts.
Do you have any to offer, i.e., not your opinion dumping on Democrats as usual, but procedural information.

If so, Thank you.

[depakid]

41. Wyldwolf gave you committee chairs below- they set the agenda, have subpoena power and hold hearings

Again though they're all fluff (or worse) if entities and individuals defy them with impunity or obfuscate the facts. Whatever happened with that anyway? I thought once we had the Justice Department "on our side" there would be some action on all of that.

It also doesn't make a bit of difference if you call eminent economists like Simon Johnson in to testify- and then fail to heed any of his advice.

[asdjrocky]

9. +1

[FrenchieCat]

13. +1 is not an answer........

I'm looking for answers, and you didn't have one......nor did the post to which you were responding.

We are not 8th graders here. I'm asking a serious question, and those who are not willing to answer would better serve the thread by staying out, cause hardy-har-har responses aren't what I'm asking about.

[asdjrocky]

22. FC, if I've told you once I've told you a hundred times-

I don't talk to cement.

[FrenchieCat]

25. Why are you in this thread?

If you don't talk to cement? Whatever that means.

[ipaint]

49. You owe me a keyboard.

:rofl:

[FrenchieCat]

3. I know we have smart DUers out there?

Anyone wants to provide an answer to my question?

[valerief]

5. I thought the lobbyist money one was pretty good. nt

[FrenchieCat]

7. Who chairs the committees & Subcommittees? and who selects those chairs?

And what impact do committees have on how Congress is ran?

I'm not asking for political snarks, I'm asking for procedural facts.

[valerief]

12. I dunno. Your question was 'what advantages do the Majority hold'. nt

[FrenchieCat]

15. Do you know of any?

As for lobbyist money and where it goes, do you have a link that clearly shows that the Majority gets the lion's share? Thanks.

[valerief]

21. Do you have a wrench?

[FrenchieCat]

23. I'm asking for a link to give more details on the lobbyists that you say give more to the Majority.

Do you have one?

[valerief]

26. http://senate.gov/

[FrenchieCat]

31. I went there. What do I do now?

How do I verify that what you are saying is true?

[valerief]

38. You can't verify that I said to go to senate.gov. You'll have to have faith. nt

[FrenchieCat]

40. you say......"You can't verify that I said to go to senate.gov."?????

I'm sorry, but that sentence is hard to understand....
can you come again, so that even I can understand what you are trying to say. :shrug:

I went to the site, and didn't see where it discuss lobbyists.
I was asking you to support your statement that lobbyist pay the majority more,
but you didn't provide any evidence of this, and the senate.gov link you provided
didn't either.

Are we here to discuss facts, or just to play games? :shrug:

[prolesunited]

14. Ha, ha!

You must be in the wrong place.

I've repeatedly pointed out the majority party chairs the committees and decides what gets to the floor, basically setting the legislative agenda for either the Senate or House.

If people think the Congress is gridlocked now, just wait until Dems don't have any control at all. The GOP wants *nothing* done so Obama loses in '12.

I don't buy the argument that there's no difference between the parties or that a Republican is just as good as Bayh. But, apparently the fact that I am a Democrat and that I actually live in Indiana are irrelevant.

[FrenchieCat]

16. That's more of what I'm looking for. Real answers to my real question.

thank you for your time on this.

So the majority party chairs the committees? What do those committees decide exactly?

as well, when we speak of "what gets to the floor", what does that mean in political terms?

[wyldwolf]

8. Committee Chairs

[FrenchieCat]

11. Can I get more than a two words answer?

[wyldwolf]

17. Committee Chairs, ma'am. :)

they have the power to control news cycles.

[valerief]

19. Ha!

:spray:
:rofl:

[FrenchieCat]

20. That's cheap! Come on! Can I get a slightly more detailed answer?

Geeze! I know today is a holiday, but still!

[wyldwolf]

28. when a party controls a committee, it controls the news cycle, for one thing

The party's position is more dominant and heard more often. 2006 gave us:

- Congressman George Miller, Chairman of Education and Workforce Committee
- Congressman Barney Frank, Chairman of Financial Services
- Congressman Henry Waxman, Chairman of Government Reform
- Congressman Bennie Thompson, Chairman of Homeland Security Committee
- Congressman Tom Lantos, Chairman of International Relations Committee
- Congressman John Conyers, Chairman of Judiciary Committee
- Congresswoman Louise Slaughter, Chairwoman of Rules Committee
- Congresswoman Nydia Velazquez, Chairwoman of Small Business Committee
- Congressman Charles Rangel, Chairman of Ways and Means Committee

[frazzled]

27. Setting the agenda and controlling what bills will come up for vote

It's hugely important.

[prolesunited]

30. Wouldn't know that by reading here

This place is getting as detached from reality as FR and the teabaggers.

[FrenchieCat]

32. Yep, I read a lot of snark that doesn't appreciate the seriousness of my question.

Why wouldn't my question be taken more seriously?

Why wouldn't someone bothering to respond to this thread
not want to make a contribution beyond basically saying the differences
are slight? What would be that person's agenda, since it is not in
even providing information when asked....yet still bothering to respond
to the thread?

[seaglass]

34. Because no one believes that you are that ignorant. n/t

[FrenchieCat]

35. I'm asking for input.....

Do you have any?

[Cary]

46. Why would 25% of DUers think it's okay to be gleeful over . . .

Republican victories?

You ask great questions Frenchie. Unfortunately the riff raff can't handle or appreciate great questions and I think a lot of the smart DUers have gotten sick and tired of the riff raff.

[wyldwolf]

33. "getting?"

[valerief]

39. did you try http://www.opensecrets.org/? nt

[FrenchieCat]

43. Why would I?

Did you want to provide info from there to make a point or other? :shrug:

(I understand the point you would like to make, but I don't see you providing the the evidence to back up it up, which in my opinion is important....or else you aren't any different from the talking heads that just say things, but cannot prove them.)

[valerief]

58. Are you 12 or just lazy? nt

[polichick]

42. Depends on which party you're talking about - they don't play by the same rules. nt

[FrenchieCat]

44. Either/or......

I'm asking about the procedural processess in each body. What is the majority able to do that the minority cannot regardless of who is in power?

[polichick]

45. Republicans manage to do whatever they want, majority or minority...

Dems manage not to do anything, majority or minority. "Procedural process" be damned.

[FrenchieCat]

47. So the stimulus was passed by the minority?

I'm sorry, you talk a good game, use plenty of "zingers",
but I don't believe you.

[Name removed]

48. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[FrenchieCat]

50. So you believe we would have been better off without a stimulus?

because that is what a Republican majority would have gotten you.

You see, not only do I see the game clearly, but I'm also not on the wrong field
nor cheering the wrong team inadvertently.

[polichick]

51. You're so busy jumping up and down, you completely miss the fact...

...that we didn't have to water down the stimulus in the first place - Dems refuse to use their majority.

You're cheering whatever bullshit Team Obama shovels.

[FrenchieCat]

53. My question is as is stated in the OP......

and you didn't bother to answer it.

You are talking about what happened, but that's not what I'm asking.

I'm asking about what would happen with a Republican majority,
and you can't bring yourself to say the truth,
that in that case we wouldn't have even had a stimulus package voted on period....
nor would we have had extension of unemployment, nor SCHIPS which passed,
nor equal pay for equal work, etc....as none of those things would have been brought to the floor,
for a vote, let alone it been negotiated or watered down.

In otherwords, you are so invested in denigrading the Obama administration
above all else, and me while you are at it,
you can't even think straight enough to tell the truth within this thread,
in particular about specifically what I asked.

The reality is that you have no constructive information to offer to this thread,
nor do you offer any substance of thought; just bullshit snark.

[Cary]

54. You're overusing that excuse

Why don't you just answer the questions?

[treestar]

55. Because they don't all agree

Republicans stick together.

[Democat]

56. Democrats don't want to upset anyone!

Democratic politicians don't want to make anyone mad!

[craigmatic]

52. It means having the power to make the minority take hard votes