WASHINGTON — The Badger State’s peculiar presence in politics is arguably best felt in the Senate where two politically-polar opposites represent the state.
They are one of only six states with lawmakers from opposite parties in the Senate, the fewest in history. Analysts said the shrinking number of split delegations reflects the increasing partisanship of the nation's politics.
“There are red states and there are blue states and the senators are reflecting those red states and blue states,” said Craig Volden, the co-director of the Center for Effective Lawmaking. “Very few purple states are left in the middle."
Senate odd couples
Volden said, historically, a split U.S. senate delegation was the signs of a less red and blue and more purple electorate.
“Classically, at least over the past 50 some years, that comes from just being a state that's pretty moderate,” said Volden. “With lots of moderates, from time to time, you'll get a Democrat elected and time to time you'll get a Republican elected.”
But Wisconsin is an example of a second model, one where voters twice elected two politicians from opposite ends respectively in progressive Democrat Tammy Baldwin and staunch Trump ally, Republican Ron Johnson.
“There are a lot of really strong partisan Democrats and a lot of really strong partisan Republicans, and which senator wins isn't based on appealing to the middle,” said Volden. “It's based on winning your primary and then it just happening to align with with that election and mobilizing your base moving forward.”
Both senators rarely ever vote out of lockstep with their respective parties. While being on the same page doesn’t automatically hurt Wisconsinites, Volden believes there are plenty of missed opportunities for the state when they don’t cross the aisle.
"The benefits for those moderate states of having one Republican senator and one Democratic senator, especially if they're willing to work together, would be moving the state's interests forward in kind of that moderate catering or at least not extreme viewpoint of what's good public policy,” he said.
Crossing the aisle
A look at their legislative records show they’ve come together mostly to push through procedural or ceremonial work.
“Well, there's obviously things that relate to the state of Wisconsin that we partner on: Filling vacancies for judicial appointments that the President will make requires us to work on a bipartisan basis to screen applicants and make recommendations,” said Sen. Baldwin. “And same with some of the other presidential appointments that come from Wisconsin. So that's a key area where one has to work closely with the other senator. That has worked in the past.”
Sen. Johnson, too, doesn’t see a problem with their limited interactions on Capitol Hill. He said coming together fill vacancies is a top priority.
The way you do that is find areas of agreement.”“That's not a small thing,” he said. “I think we've done that pretty effectively with a pretty nonpartisan condition. Certainly, when I was chairman of [Senate Homeland Security Committee], I was able to pass more than 130 pieces of legislation on a bipartisan basis. The way you do that is find areas of agreement.”
A sentiment shared by Democratic Sen. Sherrod Brown but executed with different results. He and Republican Sen. Rob Portman both represent Ohio.
“I have always worked across the aisle with my Republican colleagues and I will continue to do so – from the 2018 Farm Bill to the recent infrastructure deal,” said Sen. Brown in a statement to Spectrum News.
Sen. Portman was a key negotiator for the $1.2 trillion infrastructure legislation and co-signed two provisions in it that Sen. Brown sponsored.
“For Senators Johnson and Baldwin, what we found, on our effectiveness metrics, they're about average middle of the pack,” said Volden. “But, you know, if our research holds, they would both become more effective if they were to think earlier on about the highest profile bills that they want to move forward, and who they can work with on the other side.”
)
)
