The Hill has a whip list of senators who might be on the fence about voting for the president’s jobs bill. Although not technically a Democrat, Joe Lieberman is listed as being for cloture but against the bill. In other words, he won’t prevent a vote on the bill, but he won’t support it. Sen. Jon Tester (D-MT), who is up for reelection, is listed as a “no” on the bill and as “leaning no” on voting to end the filibuster. Sens. Joe Manchin (D-WV) and Ben Nelson (D-NE) are listed as being opposed to both the bill and cloture. Max Baucus (D-MT) and Jim Webb (D-VA) are listed as undecided. Finally, Mary Landrieu (D-LA) and Bernie Sanders (I-VT) are listed as leaning in favor of the bill.
The bill would need 50 votes to pass (with Biden casting the tie-breaker) assuming it first won 60 votes for cloture. Clearly, that is not happening. But it would be nice if the Democrats come blame failure on the filibuster, not on the fact that less than half of the Senate supports the bill. Greg Sargent has a piece at the Washington Post where he talks with prominent centrist pollster Stan Greenberg about what moderate Senate Democrats should do. Greenberg often argues the DLC-line, but he’s not telling anyone to cut sail on the jobs bill.
In an interview with me this morning, Greenberg made a strong case that moderate Senate Democrats in red states would be foolish and shortsighted if they vote against the American Jobs Act today, as some of them appear to be prepared to do…
…“They reduce their risks for reelection by showing support for a jobs bill that’s going to be increasingly popular as voters learn more about it,” Greenberg said. “They have to be for something on the economy, and this the kind of proposal they should support. If I were advising them, I’d say you want to be backing a jobs bill with middle class tax cuts paid for by tax hikes on millionaires. Moderate voters in these states very much want to raise taxes on the wealthy to meet our obligations.”
Crucially, Greenberg pointed out that if moderate Dems are hoping to show distance from the President and his low approval numbers by voting against the jobs bill, they run another risk: Dem disunity on the economy could backfire on them.
“Voting No would increase their risk of losing,” Greenberg said bluntly. “Democrats would look divided on their central agenda. In the end you all go down with the ship here. Why would you send Democrats back to the Senate if they are divided on the most important issue facing people? Here you can show unity and purpose, which Democrats have not had an opportunity to do during budget negotiations.”
Whether you represent Nebraska, West Virginia, or Montana, your chances of getting reelected as a Democrat go up or down with the performance of the president in the next election. If you undercut him and make him look weak, your own reelection prospects go down. The president isn’t doing anything unpopular right now. His jobs bill is popular all across the country. Even in states where Obama is very unpopular, the same cannot be said of the bill he’s pushing. Helping him will make him less unpopular.
As always, I suspect the influence of corporate money and/or post-Senate job prospects is more responsible for the reticence of the wavering Democrats than anything that the voters might think.
But, seriously, if you’re Jon Tester, you know you want to vote for the bill. Don’t let some asshat consultant talk you out of it.
