Barack Obama’s life gets more complicated.

PHILADELPHIA - Well, the Democrats and their president are in trouble. They have lost what the Americans call their "filibuster-proof" Senate majority, and this probably spells the end for any major policy changes they wanted, including the proposed healthcare reform, and maybe even for Ben Bernanke's reappointment.

By way of quick explanation, in the US Senate, there is a rule that states that any Senator - there are a total of 100, two from each state - can talk for as long as he or she wants, on any topic he or she likes (and believe me, they do) before a vote is cast on a bill. This process of endlessly talking and debating and generally shilly-shallying is a way for the minority party in the Senate to hold up legislation that it really doesn't want to see passed - Senators can just endlessly delay voting on a particular bill by refusing to stop discussing it, a process which is called a filibuster.

The only way to prevent this horrific mechanism from unfolding is to get 60 Senators to invoke closure, which means that the others have to give up their ranting and vote.

Until very recently, the Democrats were in the happy position of having 60 Senators in their team - well, a few were independents, but could usually be counted on to side with the Democrats at crunch time - which is a filibuster-proof majority. Then Ted Kennedy died, leaving an open seat in Massachusetts.

Initially, the Democrats weren't too worried; Massachusetts has long been a Democratic stronghold, they even allow gay marriage in that state, so everyone assumed that the Democratic candidate Martha Coakley was a shoe-in. Unfortunately for the blue team, this wasn't the case.

Across the Atlantic Podcast

African labour costs vs the
rest of the world

Download interview

Instead, Scott P Brown, the Republican candidate, took the seat, leaving the Democrats with a lousy 59 seats in the Senate, and opening up the way for Republican Senators to permanently enmesh Democratic legislation in filibuster.

So much for the arcane procedural rules, what does this all mean? Well, for a start, it means bye-bye healthcare reform.

Healthcare was supposed to Obama's signature issue, his big contribution to the future of the country. He staked a lot on this pony, and the debate about healthcare became one of the biggest bones of contention in US politics last year. Everyone was fighting about everything, much mud was slung, and the news media got plenty of mileage out of man-in-the-street interviews featuring comments denigrating the British National Health Service and Canada (known for its politeness, delicious maple syrup, and universal health coverage).

But now it's all over. Some wishy-washy, toned down healthcare reform will pass - hopefully they'll end the insurance companies' right to cancel the policies of people who get sick - but the war is lost.

And the president's woes don't end there. Another of Obama's plans, the reappointment of Ben Bernanke as governor of the Federal Reserve, is also under threat. Bernanke's first term expires on January 31, and there's a chance that the president isn't going to get enough votes in Congress to get him reappointed. Members of congress are reacting to the increasingly anti-bank mood of the American public and withdrawing support for Bernanke, who is seen as implicated in the massive bank bailouts, and in decisions that led to the financial crisis, including a failure to regulate mortgage and derivatives markets.

Although hopes are high that Bernanke will scrape through, it will be a close thing, and a failure to reappoint him could seriously hurt the dollar. Anything that increases uncertainty in the markets is a bad thing, and since there are no other candidates up for the job, if Bernanke is rejected it would create a lot of confusion. Obama and his team will be working overtime to make sure that Bernanke gets the nod, but the fact that this is in doubt is a blow to the president.

Obama took the job of US president at a very tough time. As at his inauguration, the US was engaged in two expensive and energy-consuming wars, the world's financial system was sputtering and threatening to collapse, the US economy was in a tailspin, and the US government's future obligations in terms of social entitlements and public debt were enough to make a grown man cry.

Things haven't really changed much. The wars continue, the financial system still creaks, the US economy is on shaky grounds and the budget remains stubbornly unbalanced. The real difference between then and now is that when Obama was elected, the Democrats were riding a wave of public antipathy towards Republicans, and enjoyed supermajorities in both houses of Congress. Now, although Democrats remain decisively the majority, they no longer have the numbers to ram through any legislation they like.

In other words, Obama has to deal with the same constellation of problems, only now he has to forge consensus not just within his own combative and cantankerous party, but also between his party and the bellicose and quarrelsome Republicans.

Makes your own job seem much more fun.

Write to Felicity Duncan: felicity@moneyweb.co.za or follow her on Twitter at http://twitter.com/FelicityDuncan

COMMENTS

View disclaimer

 

responses to this article

Libertarian victory...? You make it sound like the Republican victory in Massachusetts was bad thing..?..rolling back the tidal wave of proposed socialist legislation is a bad thing..? Incidentally, 49% of voters in Massachusetts are indepenent and Brown won over 80% of . .more them ,,becuase he ran a centrist campaign ..fiscally conservative (read free market and limited government) , but socially liberal ...healthcare ..like electricity (RE South Africa) is not a right...its a privilege earned through hard work or the charity of broader society , should they so choose ...The Republican party needs more moderate candidates such as Brown and hence is victory was probably the most positive event in US politics in many years... . .less by Mises on January 27 2010, 22:51 Find this comment inappropriate? Report it

helicopter ben not being re-elected going to send markets down around 20%, up trend was breached last week and will go down further on monday by frank on January 28 2010, 00:00 Find this comment inappropriate? Report it

Felicity Duncan should get a bonus That is an unbelievable piece of journalism. Well done. You add more value than all those fools in Davos put together. by Senhor on January 28 2010, 00:23 Find this comment inappropriate? Report it

The big problem is that politicians are given a full time job of making laws, and that is what they try do. We don't need new laws every day. We need a competent executive government. by BP on January 28 2010, 01:15 Find this comment inappropriate? Report it

nice cool piece! by edward on January 28 2010, 03:35 Find this comment inappropriate? Report it

US politics is bipartisan in reality! Good piece. I do not think the Republican victory in Mass signals anything in terms of substance. It is more symbolic and an indictment of America 's drive towards "change". Republicans did not win Mass senate: Dems lost it because, unlike most . .more people seem to believe, America is conservative and so are the Dems. Obama 's attempt to bring about left leaning policiies such as helth reform does not need a Republican filibuster to come to a halt: the Dems will do the job without the help from GOPers. So, Obama has faced the first reality of American politics: there is a thin line dividing the Dems and GOPers. The system is very entrenched across the two political parties. By the way, the Dems are not unanimous on anything, they are very much divided on the issues and geographic politics/interstate. Good piece thought provoking! . .less by Ralph on January 28 2010, 04:05 Find this comment inappropriate? Report it

@ Frank Hey Frank, do you reckon this is the start of the 2nd part of the double dip recession? US unemployment still increasing with no end in sight and China imports starting to drop off not going to be good for US. by Kramer on January 28 2010, 05:48 Find this comment inappropriate? Report it

A mishmash cobbled together from basic news sources. No insight, even less analysis. Felicity, I know you're s'posed to be full of brightness and all that, but really. There are terabytes of opinion on the intertubez worth linking to for the education of Moneyweb's readers who . .more plainly never got much further in browsing after making this their homepage. @Libertarian: When you get over your teenage-style infatuation with that pervert Ayn Rand, try offering a bit more than cut-and-pasted stuff from HotAir or Townhall or wherever "Right" thinking people like to hang out. Try LGF (littlegreenfootballs) to see what happens when a hard line right wing zealot begins to actually think. . .less by CobbleCobble on January 28 2010, 07:14 Find this comment inappropriate? Report it

Great article Im working in the US at the moment and this piece gives great background to politics here. Well done! by Stuart on January 28 2010, 08:59 Find this comment inappropriate? Report it

@cobblecobble Nice insight and suggestion Dear Sir/Mada/Other. by . on January 28 2010, 10:42 Find this comment inappropriate? Report it

Nice one Great view on the US political arena, its amazing how the system works and I look forword to reading more of your work, "Filibuster" if we had anything close to this in SA house of Parliment, it would stop lots of corruption out of government at . .more its initial stage of thought. . .less by Buddy on January 29 2010, 11:31 Find this comment inappropriate? Report it

Name
Subject
Comment

View disclaimer