So, what does Senator Sinema’s move from D to I really mean? (Apart from more coverage of the Senator herself?). If, as had been reported Sinema will not caucus the Republicans (i.e., formally join the GOP coalition), then Alexandra Petri’s column on the subject answers the question: Bad news! Nothing about Kyrsten Sinema will change.
I will say that the good news for Democrats is that as long as Sinema does not fully join the Rs, they will have more control over the chamber than they did in the previous Congress. Specifically, under the current Congress (the 117th) the Democrats and Republicans have parity on committees since the chamber is split 50-50, and overall leadership only goes to the Ds because Vice President Harris has the tiebreaking vote.
I would note, for accuracy’s sake, that the chamber has actually been 48 D’s, 50 R’s, and 2 I’s. However, the two I’s (King of Maine and Sanders of Vermont) formally caucus with the D’s (meaning, most importantly, they voted for Schumer to be Majority Leader). We largely talk like there are 50 D’s, but that is not the case.
The 118th Congress is set to open with a Senate seat breakdown of 48 D’s, 49 R’s, and 3 I’s. The new I is Sinema, who declared her independence from the heavy strictures of American party discipline this week (please read that phrase as in a tone that would suggest a highly sarcastic read by a political scientist giving a lecture). Now, since we know that King and Sanders will continue to caucus with the Democrats, we know, as a minimum, that the Democratic caucus has 50 seats, the Republicans 49, and the Sinemas 1.
So even if for reason Sinema were to remain an island unto her herself, the Democrats will control leadership, free and clear, and control a majority of seats on all the committees.
Note that if Sinema stayed out of party caucuses altogether she would lose access to the better committee assignments that the Democrats have. Ergo, she is going to caucus with the D’s, making the overall count 51-49, as it was before her declaration of firm and total independence.
NPR reported this week:
she’s keeping her Senate committee assignments through Democrats and won’t be caucusing with Republicans suggests otherwise.
So, despite the seeming betrayal of the Democrats, her label switch is not quite as dramatic as many have thought. Indeed, I would note that while some Democrats want her punished for her look-at-me shenanigans, the worst thing they could do is incentivize her to caucus with the R’s, since it would upset the committee seat structure applecart (back to parity).
Note: I suspect at some point she may threaten to do just that, because, boy, wouldn’t that generate some press?
The issue of her party affiliation is going to mainly be about her 2024 re-election campaign as her independent status will allow her to bypass a primary challenge within the Democratic Party and run in a three-way race for the office. Since she would likely lose in the Democratic primary, this is her best bet to preserve a re-election pathway. An alternative theory is that she is leaving options open for a post-Senate career in lobbying or media.
Have I ever noted that American parties are institutionally weak and that usage of labels is fluid and largely left to the whims of individual politicians? I think maybe I have.
