Is "BTUing" Obsolete?

Ezra brings up an interesting point about the House, which apparently likely to vote for hopeless Social Security legislation this year. On its face, this does indeed seem remarkably stupid. However, I think some things have changed since 1994 that makes “BTUing” a much less significant factor. (Well, actually, I’m pretty skeptical that the BTU issue had much of anything to do with the Republican takeover in 1994 in the first place, but let’s say for the sake of argument that it played a role.)

• Rational Party Re-alignment. One reason that the Republicans were able to take over in 1994 is that there were still a significant number of Democratic seats (especially in the south) in ideologically conservative districts. Eventually, they were going to turn Republican, and many did in 1994. There are a lot fewer of these districts for Republicans to cherry-pick now, however.
• Computer Gerrymandering. We’ve had at least one more round of sophisticated gerrymandering, which combines with the point above to make the number of non-safe seats exceedingly small. Most House Republicans just aren’t vulnerable, no matter what kind of Social Security Legislation they vote for.
• Increased Party Discipline. The increasingly Parliamentary nature of the House makes it much more likely that a Social Security privatization bill can be rammed through. Even for the relatively small number of members for whom a vote for a phase-out bill would put their re-election at risk, the risks of being cut out of party money and support are likely to be greater.

Combining all these factors, I think it’s actually quite likely that this will happen, but unfortunately I’m not sure it will be quite the boon to Democrats that some think.

As a final point, while most interested people are at least vaguely aware of these trends, I think their effects on American democracy deserve a lot more attention. The House, which was designed to be the short-term majoritarian snapshot of shifting interests and values, has in some ways become even more insulated from these trends than the Senate. This really throws a wrench into the constitutional framework. Alas, it’s much easier to identify the problem than to fix it; the problems of path dependence are pretty dire.