At any rate, today’s question is from my pal Roger Green, who asked:
How, if at all, does Sinema becoming an independent change the Senate operations? How does it affect her running for reelection in 2024? Will Manchin follow suit?
The first question is the easiest: It won’t necessarily change anything because under the very, very best circumstances, her vote for Democratic bills was always unreliable, and her demands many. Her being an independent won’t change her behaviour at all.
It’s also true that there were already two independents in the US Senate who caucus with the Democrats: Bernie Sanders of Vermont and also Angus King of Maine. Sanders might be considered an “Independent Democrat” mainly because he’s sought the Democratic Party’s nomination for US President. Like Sinema, he’s often criticised Democrats’ policies, priorities, etc., though for reasons opposite hers. That means that there’s a precedent for Sinema caucusing with Democrats while also criticising Democrats.
It seems probable to me that the entire reason Sinema declared herself an independent is Arizona’s 2024 US Senate election. She’s too far to the Right for the Democratic Party that selected her—on a supposedly progressive platform, no less—and she’s too far Left for the Republican Party (although, to be fair, the vast majority of Americans would be called “far leftist” by many Republicans…). Her political problem arose because she betrayed the Democratic voters of Arizona who nominated her, and all the voters of Arizona who sent her to the US Senate believing her when she campaigned as a progressive.
Her treachery means that she was absolutely certain to have been primaried in the 2024 elections, and it’s highly likely that she would have lost re-nomination as a Democrat. However, she could never win nomination as a Republican, so that left only one option: Become an independent. It’s just her typical self-centred, “it’s ALL about me!” vanity. It’s also a sensible move—though crass and somewhat egomaniacal.
The fact is, she has—yet again—betrayed Democrats by blocking their options through giving them the poison pill of letting her win to prevent Republicans winning the seat. This is because Arizona still has a large and powerful rightwing in the state, despite trending “Blue”. She’s betting that Republicans might nominate an at least “not absolutely horrible” candidate, and if Democrats don’t nominate a strong candidate (or one at all), then she can get re-elected by slipping between the two parties.
She may well think that Democrats would prefer to nominate a weak candidate—or none at all—to avoid the possibility of losing the seat to the Republicans (again, assuming Republicans don’t nominate a whack-job). That’s because 2024 could well be a difficult year for Democrats to hold the Senate (and in general, actually…): The party risks losing seats in the Senate. Sinema thinks that Democrats will see letting her win as making it a bit less likely they’ll lose control of the Senate in 2024—and she’s probably right. It’s actually brilliant, in an “evil genius” and “Machiavellian” sort of way.
However, none of this applies to Joe Manchin. No one could credibly call him a “liberal”, and absolutely not a “leftist”. However, with the Republican Party as extremist as it now is, there’s no room for a conservative Democrat to join them because he’s definitely not conservative enough for the Republican Party. If he were to become an Independent, he’d probably lose re-election: West Virginia is hard-right, and were he an independent conservatives would probably vote for the “real” conservative, the Republican.
In West Virginia’s 2018 Senate election, Manchin won with only 49.57% of the vote (the Republican and the Libertarian split the rest of the vote). If a Democrat—even a weak candidate—was in the race with a Republican and an independent Manchin, the Republican would be almost certain to win. There's currently no reason to think that West Virginia voters would be keen to elect an independent Senator if Democrats sat out the election. On balance, if re-election is something he cares about—and he’s said it isn’t—he’d be better off becoming a Republican, but that would be an even bigger betrayal of voters than Sinema’s. On the other hand, Manchin will be 77 in 2024 and may choose to retire, which would make all of this moot—and an almost certain pick-up for Republicans.
So, Sinema becoming an independent won’t change much of anything about the way the Senate operates under Democratic control, nor will it change her behaviour as a Senator. The only thing it may change is the political calculations relating to who might win that Arizona Senate seat in 2024, and so, who does win it. None of that applies to Manchin. He stands to gain almost nothing from becoming an independent, and it could make it harder for him to win re-election, should he choose that.
Thanks to Roger for today’s topic!
It’s not too late to ask a question: Simply leave a comment on this post (anonymous comments are allowed). Or, you can email me your question (and you can even tell me to keep your name secret, although, why not pick a nom de question?). You can also ask questions on the AmeriNZ Facebook page, though keep in mind that all Facebook Pages are public, just like this blog. To avoid being public there, you can send me a private message through the AmeriNZ Facebook Page..
All posts in this series are tagged “AAA-21”. All previous posts from every “Ask Arthur” series are tagged, appropriately enough, ”Ask Arthur”.
Previously:
A decade-long inquisition
Ask Arthur 2022, Part 1: Speaking in the House
No comments:
Post a Comment