If Election Were Held Today, Democrats Would Win House In A Landslide — And Only Win A 5 Seat Majority

By Ian Millhiser/Think Progress

According to a Quinnipiac poll released today, if the election were held today 43 percent of the electorate would support a Democratic U.S. House candidate, as opposed to just 35 percent who would back a Republican. That 8 point lead for Democrats is significantly more than the GOP’s margin of victory during the 2010 Republican wave election (6.6 percent) and even more that the Democratic margin of victory during the 2006 wave (7.9 percent) — when Democrats were bolstered by both an unpopular Republican president and a failing war in Iraq. And yet, if Democrats succeed in maintaining this substantial lead through next year’s congressional election, they will likely emerge with a tiny majority of just 5 seats.

Last January, the Republican Party published a triumphant report bragging that “Republicans enjoy a 33-seat margin in the U.S. House seated yesterday in the 113th Congress, having endured Democratic successes atop the ticket and over one million more votes cast for Democratic House candidates than Republicans.” The report touts the role GOP gerrymandering played in enabling Republicans to keep the House despite losing the popular vote, citing states like Michigan, where “Michiganders cast over 240,000 more votes for Democratic congressional candidates than Republicans, but still elected a 9-5 Republican delegation to Congress.”

Indeed, Republican gerrymandering was so successful during the last redistricting cycle that Democrats would likely need to win the national popular vote by more than 7 points in order to win the barest of majorities in the House. In 2012, gerrymandering enabled 215 House Republicans to win their elections by at least 8 points or more — only 218 seats are needed to control a majority of the House. Thus, assuming Democratic gains are evenly distributed nationwide, even if Democrats won the 8 point landslide predicted by the Quinnipiac poll they would control the House by only a narrow 220-215 margin. If this poll is off by just one point, and Democrats win by only 7 points, Republicans will retain control of the House by a single seat.

This is not democracy. It does not even approximate democracy. It is a series of elections that create the illusion of democracy while they are actually rigged to make it nearly impossible for Republicans to lose. As one Princeton study determined, it’s as if 1.7 million fewer Democrats had simply not showed up to vote in seven key states.

It’s also largely the fault of the Supreme Court. Although partisan gerrymandering violates the First Amendment’s prohibition on viewpoint discrimination, a 5-4 Supreme Court decided inVieth v. Jubelirer to simply ignore such constitutional violations.

New poll finds more Americans in favor of eliminating the filibuster.

By Zaid Jilani One of the greatest obstacles to passing progressive legislation in Congress has been the use of the filibuster in the Senate. With upwards of “40 cloture votes since the start of the 111th Congress in January, this Senate is on pace to record the second-largest number of filibuster roll calls,” transforming what was intended to be a seldom-used procedural tactic into an all-out tool for obstructionism. Now, a new CBS/New York Times poll finds that more Americans support ending the filibuster and requiring legislation to pass by a simple majority: As you may know, the Senate operates under procedures that effectively require 60 votes, out of 100, for most legislation to pass, allowing a minority of as few as 41 senators to block a majority. Do you think this procedure should remain in place, or do you think it should be changed so that legislation is passed with a simple majority? Should remain 44 Should be changed 50 [Don't Know] 6 Changing the filibuster would not be without precedent. In 1975, the filibuster threshold was lowered from 67 to 60. Sens. Tom Harkin (D-IA) and Jeanne Shaheen (D-NH) have introduced legislation that would “change Senate procedure to create a four-step process that would eventually allow a majority of 51 votes, rather than 60, for cloture — ending debate and moving to a final vote on passage of a bill.” Yet Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) has “dismissed the effort” as unlikely to succeed. OpenLeft’s Chris Bowers has an ongoing whip count for the effort to pass Harkin’s reforms here.

Issa Says Democratically Elected Democratic Congress Is ‘Exactly The Same’ As Kazakhstan’s Dictatorship

By Zaid Jilani Tuesday, during a hearing of the Helsinki Commission — an independent U.S. agency charged with promoting security and economic cooperation with eastern Europe and central Asia — that featured Kazakh foreign minister Kanat Saudabayev, Rep. Darrell Issa (R-CA) showed contempt for human rights by telling Saudabayev that Kazakhstan’s nature as a virtual dictatorship doesn’t concern him because “Washington, D.C. is exactly the same” because it is controlled by Democrats:

ISSA: I want to share with you something here today. Washington, D.C., is exactly the same. This is a one-party town, even though there are people who are not Democrats. And this town has decided to have representation, at least one member of the council, who is chosen simply to represent minorities.

Of course, Democratic-controlled Washington, D.C., is not the same as Kazahkstan. The central Asian country is classified by the CIA as an “authoritarian” state with “little power outside the executive branch.” While Saudabayev “is in Washington speaking about Kazahkstan’s committment to democratic norms” as part of his country’s bid to lead the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe, the independent press in his country continues to face “harassment … and physical assault,” and Freedom House ranks it as one of the least free countries in the world, tied with Saudi Arabia.

The United States, meanwhile, is ranked by human rights and democracy promotion groups as one of the freest countries in the world. And unlike Kazahkstan’s government, Democrats were democratically elected to power in both 2006 and 2008. While Issa may be upset that voters rejected his political party at the polls, it is an insult both to people who voted those Democrats into power and to Kazakh human rights activists fighting for a more democratic Kazakhstan to compare the Democratic Congress to the current Kazakh regime. (HT: Harper’s)

M.C.L comment: It seems when the Republicans had the majority and shutting out the Democratic minority that was ok, that was part of the democratic process. The Republican minority have chosen to take themselves out of the process because they want this president and his party to fail so badly so by default they can wiggle their sorry butts back into power. Republicans don't give a flying fig about governing it's about power plain and simple.