I don’t know how many of you saw this interesting article in Politico yesterday about Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid. For those who didn’t, the crucial paragraph is this:
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D.-Nev.) and his deputy, Majority Whip Richard Durbin (D.-Ill.) were called to Pelosi’s office late Thursday night and ultimately prevailed in their argument that Democrats should try to salvage the bill, which includes critical spending increases for vital agencies. But the heated, sometimes profane, exchanges were described as “ugly” by Democrats on both sides of the Capitol. Staff, kicked out in the hall, could hear the yelling, and Pelosi herself seemed a little abashed the next day, joking that nothing her leadership could say to her now would match the night before.
In one sense, this story really doesn’t mean very much. As any college student can tell you, long hours plus high stress plus (very likely) over-caffination mean incredibly nasty fights. Just ask my roommate about the time I sto…er, borrowed his food without any immediate intention of returning it.
But this isn’t the first sign we’ve seen of a split between the north and south side of the Capitol. And it is extremely unusual for two leaders of the same party to be so hostile, at least in public. So what’s really going on here?
I suspect part of the tension might be the inherent difference between the two chambers. The rules of the House of Representatives allow it to be run by a simple majority. If Pelosi can find 218 votes she wins. Always. Senate procedure forces Reid to finagle 100 supposedly free agents. Further, since the time of Thomas Reed, the Speaker has enjoyed enormous power to manipulate the House and its proceedings. Even Lyndon Johnson found that the Senate Leader is just primus inter partes. Thus, we see the House vote in hours and the Senate in weeks.
But it seems to me something much larger is going on. Power on Capitol Hill has long fluctuated between the House and the Senate. In 1994, Bob Dole enjoyed a much narrower majority than Harry Reid does today. Yet Newt Gingrich dictated the terms to Dole; it fell to the Kansas to shepherd much of the Contract with America through the Senate.
It’s not hard to understand why Pelosi and the House leadership would now feel outrage that the Senate, not the House, is the hurdle legislation must cross. It is not hard to guess that Pelosi might view Reid’s vacillation between pushing for the omnibus spending bill and cutting off the vote to find Senator 60 as a fundamental sign of weakness. That Reid and Durban met in Pelosi’s office rather than the other way around or in some neutral setting suggests Pelosi’s perception may hit its mark. It’s important to remember that news in Washington is as much a tool as a neutral observer; people tell stories for a reason. In this case, the message seems quite clear. Pelosi and Reid are fighting a turf war.
What are the consequences of this struggle between House and Senate? I personally find it unlikely that Pelosi will succeed in wresting power away from the Senate. As long as the Constitution mandates legislation to pass through both bodies, the greater prestige, spotlight, and rules of the Senate will continue to pose the greatest hurdle to the Democratic agenda. But what of the third party? After all, power in Washington general is a zero sum game. Any enmity between the two may ultimately weaken the President and his plans. I find it interesting that Obama has not yet intervened to stop the bloodshed. Perhaps the President plans to triangulate in a Clintonian mode. Or perhaps Obama sees disunity in Congress as an opportunity to build his own coalition, hence Rahm. Yet few Presidents have suceeded with weak Congressional support and Obama may soon need all the whips he can find.
Nonetheless, this struggle may prove most difficult for its main actors. Both Pelosi and Reid face potential threats within their caucus, Pelosi from the Blue Dogs, Reid from the moderates. If the two faces of Democratic leadership on Capitol hill do not desist in their feud, the result may be one of mutually assured destruction.
