On the trail, GOP candidates like Roberts frequently make reference to the bills the House has passed that the Senate hasn’t taken up. There are 387 of them—you can find a full list here—ranging from the “Permanent Electronic Duck Stamp Act of 2013” to bills that would expand offshore oil drilling and get rid of all or part of the Affordable Care Act. Many are what’s known as “messaging bills”—legislation that House Republicans knew would never become law and passed just to make a statement about their priorities, or to satisfy a constituency. Sending those bills through the Senate would result in a speedy Obama veto, accomplishing nothing.
This scenario is not going to happen even if Republicans take the Senate, and you need only skip back two paragraphs in the same story to see why: “With the Senate requiring a 60-vote supermajority for most legislation. . .” I think it is extremely unlikely that a new Republican majority would abolish the filibuster. They will have a limited opportunity to pass bills that aren’t subject to it: They can’t pass bill after bill that way. And bills that get enough Democratic support to overcome filibusters are likely to get Obama’s signature.
If the Republicans take the Senate, I expect Obama to use the veto more than he has in the past. (There have been two insignificant vetoes.) But it’s not going to be a regular occurrence.
Comments