A lot of my friends view American politics as a kind of showcase of the trans-mundane. Issues that would be quickly dealt with by other Democracies seem to become intractable, and propositions that are almost axiomatic elsewhere in the developed world are somehow highly disputed in the U.S.

There are a variety of reasons for this. But today i want to focus on the Senate, because more often than not it its the Senate that acts as a roadblock to measures that are widely popular outside Congress and approved of by the House of Representatives. So why is this so?

There are two crucial factors in my opinion. So lets take them in order.

Representation

Representation in the senate is not equal. The U.S started off as confederation of separate states, with each concerned about the domination by others. This was especially prevalent in smaller states that were concerned their voice would be drowned out by the more populous and wealthy states. To deal with this problem representation in the Senate was apportioned equally between the states. Each state gets 2 senators, irrespective of its population.

To put that in perspective, Wyoming has one senator per 300,000 people. California on the other hand has one senator per 20,000,000 people. Just let that sink in for a second. Nearly forty million total Californians have the same influence on the senate as the roughly  600,000 Wyomingites. So the smaller states have a vastly disproportionate influence on the Senate and thus legislation.

That is very important, because right now the Republican party is much more successful in many of the over-represented smaller states than the Democrats. States like Montana, Idaho, North Dakota, Nebraska provide reliable seats to the GOP wildly out of kilter with their populations. By contrast, New York, California, Illinois, Pennsylvania and other such large states which generally vote Democrat are under-represented.

There are exceptions to this rule. Texas is a huge and populous state where Republicans dominate that still receives only two senators, just as Georgia and North Carolina receive less influence than they probably should. And the partisan effect of this system has varied over time. It used to be that Democrats dominated these small states and used that domination to secure control of Congress for decades. So it should not be seen in any sense as a sort of Republican gerrymander. That is just how it is operating now.

The real effect of this apportionment of seats is that it gives weight to the voices of smaller states. That is why a public option (like Medicare or the NHS) couldn’t be inserted in the healthcare bill. Such a bill could pass the House of Representatives at the time, where seats were apportioned basically according to a states population, but was quickly knocked on the head in the Senate. The public option was also popular in the country, with a clear majority in favor. But it was not popular in the small electorates that make up so much of the senate. So the minority was able to use its augmented influence to block it.

So the senate isn’t fairly apportioned. Which isn’t news, as it was designed that way. But it is important to remember when considering why things are so very hard to do sometimes. The system isn’t broken, it was built that way. Its meant to be a lot harder to get things done that it is to stop them being done. Which brings us to the second reason obstruction in the Senate is so effective.

The Filibuster

This one is really very simple. Although it takes 50 votes +1 to pass a bill in the senate, it takes 60 votes to stop everyone from talking and move on to other business.  As long as you keep talking and don’t yield the floor to anyone you can delay voting on a bill indefinitely. And if you do it long enough, the Senate will have to move on to other business.

This is meant as an expression of the right of free speech as well as a protection for the minority. The implicit bargain is that the majority allows the minority to block things even with less than half the chamber on condition the minority won’t misuse that power. Theoretically the filibuster is meant for very important legislation, not just for stuff you don’t agree with.

The problem is now it is almost the default. So in order to get something even marginally contentious, or to be honest anything at all, passed in the Senate you need 60 votes. And because of how the votes are apportioned between the states it is incredibly hard to get to 60. Parties have to win in places far outside of their traditional bases of support to get to that number. Because getting voters in Massachusetts and North Dakota on the same side is hard.

Why not simply get rid of the rule? Well, thats simple. Because although it is frustrating when you are in the majority with the bulk of the voters at your back, when you are the minority defending your principles against the mob things can look very different. The same Democrats who couldn’t get the healthcare law they wanted passed because of the filibuster are now using it to delay all sorts of insane Republican policies the GOP dominated House sends them. Without the ability to block bills from the minority this legislation would all sail through. And so the filibuster persists.

What does this mean? 

The United States right now is very deeply divided along partisan and political lines, and the system is designed to protect minority opinion. So don’t expect another New Deal. Don’t expect sweeping changes in the next term. The country is undergoing a profound demographic and political transition. Until that transition is more fully realized and a new consensus can form, progress will be intensely fought and violently partisan. The population has very different ideas about how society should be organised, what should be America’s place in the world and what constitutes a good and ethical life.  And the holders of these divergent opinions will be represented in Congress as is their right.

So when will the dysfunction end?

When the voters decide what it is they want. For instance, when will abortion stop being such a hot button issue? Not when people in Washington decide to ignore it. They are merely standing on the shoulders of voters. It won’t go away until there stops being a market for that opinion.

The senate is weird. And it stops things from getting done. But whether that is good or bad really depends on where you sit on the political spectrum and in the chamber. But its also why the Senate elections are worth watching. Because make no mistake, the agenda of the next President will most likely live and die in the Senate.