What's the deal with the Senate?

Ms. TfK, normally not a fan of my political posts, asks for clarity on the Senate situation.

Two races are too close to call right now: Jim Webb and George Allen in Virginia, and Conrad Burns and Jon Tester in Montana.

George Allen was a frontrunner in the 2008 GOP presidential race until his history with white supremacists was exposed, and he decided to use an obscure French racial epithet against a Webb staffer. That race is tight enough (6,700 votes out of 2.3 million) that it won't be called until all the election boards have had a chance to review all the totals. Right now, Webb is ahead and I doubt that we'll see any change there. DNC and RNC lawyers are pitching camps in preparation for any battle that may come.

The spread in Montana is narrower, but represents a larger percentage spread. Progressive Democrat Jon Tester has a 3,100 vote lead right now, and the final call in that race will also depend on handcounts and provisional ballots. As I'm writing this, I see that those counts are final, and Tester won.

That means that, at worst, Democrats have 50 seats. That means that Democrats will have equal numbers on Senate Committees and will have equally large staffs. If Webb's lead holds (and I don't know that there's any particular reason to think it won't), Democrats will take the Senate, and I'm done with political blogging until the end of the year.

Here's hoping.

More like this

(I think that I'm done updating this post for now, as the results show no indication of changing significantly. I'll have more to say about the election tomorrow.) A Democratic majority in the Senate is all but certain, as Montana and Virginia both appear to have gone to the Democrats. This means…
Here's the rundown on some of the elections I either wrote about or just took an interest in for one reason or another. In Michigan, Dick DeVos, the pro-ID candidate for governor, was voted down by a wide margin. Proposition 4, which puts strict restrictions on eminent domain in the state, passed…
David Boaz had an article on Monday on the Fox News website suggesting that libertarians could be a key voting block in deciding the outcome of the election. Turns out he was right. He wrote: Libertarians -- people who cringe at intrusive government, high taxes, nation-building and politicians…
This is a recap of my earlier post of what to watch for in the US Senate Races. We are hoping for a 60 seat Democratic Party presence in the Senate in order to have a filibuster proof majority. Without this, any Republican with a grudge, a bad attitude, a hatred of liberal or progressive idea, or…

I'm a little confused still. I thought that the Vice President intervenes only if the Senate is tied. Since with Montana the split is 50-49 Democrats why would this be a tie rather than an outright win?

The DSCC is claiming victory in both Montana and Virginia, saying that any further incoming votes or recounts are not going to change the Dem candidate's lead in either place.

As for the commenter's question, the split can't be 50-49 because there are 100 seats total. If Allen somehow gets the nod in Virginia, then it will be a 50-50 split, and Cheney will be spending a lot of time in the Senate.

Well, there will be 100 senators in the end. If Webb wins, it's 51-49, if Allen wins it's 50-50 (assuming Independents Sanders and Lieberman caucus with Democrats, as promised).

Only if the Senate is 50-50 will Cheney get involved. He'll cast the vote to make some Republican or other the Majority Leader.

There might be 100 senators but not all 100 of them are partisan. Do the Democrats have 50 seats including the independents? And if so is the VP rule applicable based on how many senators declare themselves of one party or is it less formal than that?

The key thing is that partisan control is determined by a vote, and all 100 senators will cast a vote.

The VP breaks ties in the Senate. Any 50-50 vote, he breaks the tie. There will be a vote to choose leadership, and each caucus will put forward its candidates. Joe Lieberman and Bernie Sanders (the independents) have pledged to caucus with the Democrats in choosing leadership and in planning grand strategy. When the vote on leaders comes to the floor, 2 Independents will join 48 or 49 Democrats. If it's 48 Democrats and two Independents against 50 Republicans, Cheney breaks the tie on that vote. If D+I=51, Cheney has no role in choosing leadership.

When the minimum wage gets to the Senate, if the vote goes 50-50, Cheney will have to break that tie. That could happen even if Democrats have a majority (someone breaks ranks, or two senators are absent.