Remember That Time the Democrats Delayed a Major Vote for an Incoming Senator?

This image was removed due to legal reasons.

Here’s a funny old thing: Doug Jones’ victory last night means there will be one fewer Republican in the Senate, which could—should—mean one less vote for the massive handout to donors that is the GOP tax bill. But Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell says Luther Strange, the interim senator currently occupying the seat Jones will take once he is sworn in, will remain in the Senate until the end of the session, and Republicans say there will be a vote on the plan early next week.


But remember when... things were a little different?

[Harp music plays and the screen goes all wobbly]

In January 2010, Republican Scott Brown defeated Democrat Martha Coakley in the Senate special election in Massachusetts, right as the vote on the Affordable Care Act was coming up. But Democratic Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid said there was no rush, it’s chill:

“We’re not going to rush into anything. We’re going to wait until the new Senator arrives before we do anything more on health care. Remember, the bill we passed in the Senate is good for a year.”

That was partly thanks to then-Sen. Jim Webb, D-Va., who called Brown’s victory “a referendum not only on health care reform but also on the openness and integrity of our government process,” essentially saying that the people of Massachusetts had demanded, and deserved, a delayed vote on the bill.

The vote was eventually held in March.

[Harp music plays again; the screen wobbles and returns to focus on our faraway expressions]

So, now it’s 2017, and the Republicans control the Senate. Will they return the favor? No, dummy, they do not give a shit that the Democrats did that a few short years ago. Not even The Resistance’s problematic fave Susan Collins:


In 2010, in case you were wondering, Senator Collins said this about Scott Brown’s election (emphasis added):

“This election is an indication that voters in Massachusetts, indeed a majority of Americans, want checks and balances and do not support unfettered, one-party rule in Washington. The results of this election also reflect the fact that so many people are appalled at the process by which the health care bill was negotiated behind closed doors, rammed through the Senate with limited debate and amendments, and riddled with special deals to garner votes. People are frustrated with these tactics. They want their elected officials to set partisan politics aside and work together to forge solutions to the many challenges facing our country, particularly the need to strengthen the economy.”


As one Twitter user pointed out, change about four words and you’ve got an accurate statement about the Republican approach to the tax bill this time.


Senate Democrats are using this good-natured self-own from 2010 to argue that Republicans should do the right thing this time:

“It would be wrong for Senate Republicans to jam though this tax bill” without allowing Jones to vote, Schumer said. “That’s exactly what Republicans argued when Scott Brown was elected in 2010. . . . What’s good for the goose is good for the gander, and what’s good for the gander is good for the goose.”


Thing is: They don’t care about hypocrisy. They’ll vote on the miserable tax bill in time for the holidays, even if Mitch McConnell is visited in the night by The Ghost Of Process Arguments Past. No Christmas goose for you, only social insurance cuts in the future to pay for tax cuts for rich assholes now.

I get that Democrats are trying to pressure Republicans on this, and that they don’t really think Republicans actually give a shit about what’s good for the gander, but, like, those guys just nominated and largely stood by an alleged child molester for a Senate seat. They don’t care that you were nice to them in 2010. Just remember that next time.

Splinter politics writer.