A 50-50 split is the one outcome neither party wants among all the possible results of the midterm Senate races.
It would leave Republicans with a technical majority because Vice President J.D. Vance serves as president of the Senate and can break any tie votes.
Whether that majority could function would depend largely on Republican centrists, such as Sen. Lisa Murkowski of Alaska, who could single-handedly derail confirmation of President Trump’s nominees.
People were interested in these podcasts
Mr. Trump has recently insulted Ms. Murkowski, calling her a “disgrace” and “Republicans’ worst senator.”
The legislative landscape would be less affected because most measures would still require 60 votes to overcome a filibuster, which gives the minority party its power and has frustrated Mr. Trump throughout his presidency.
Party-line budget reconciliation bills — such as those Republicans used this Congress to pass sweeping tax cuts and a three-year infusion of immigration enforcement funding — would likely be off the table. Ms. Murkowski is not a fan of reconciliation.
If the midterm environment is favorable enough for Democrats to flip enough seats to end up with a 50-50 Senate — a net gain of three — then the party would likely win control of the House. Republicans need control of both chambers to pursue another reconciliation effort.
For Democrats, falling short of clinching the Senate majority would mean they could not force votes on whatever bills their party passes out of the House, which removes a key pressure point for Republican cooperation.
However, Democrats do gain additional leverage in the event of a 50-50 split because Senate leaders would need to negotiate a power-sharing agreement.
“The Senate has organized itself basically by each side coming together and agreeing to adopt these resolutions,” former Senate Parliamentarian Alan Frumin told The Washington Times. “Neither side filibustered them, and that’s how 50-50 Senates in 2001 and 2021 were able to organize.”
In 2000, Republicans lost Senate seats despite George W. Bush’s victory in the presidential election.
Facing the first modern 50-50 split Senate, then-Senate Republican Leader Trent Lott of Mississippi negotiated a power-sharing agreement with Democratic Leader Tom Daschle of South Dakota to govern the chamber.
Another 50-50 Senate emerged after the 2020 election when Joseph R. Biden ousted Mr. Trump from the White House and Democrats picked up Senate seats.
Senate Majority Leader Charles E. Schumer, New York Democrat, and Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, Kentucky Republican, modeled their power-sharing agreement after the measure used 20 years earlier.
Both agreements provided for equal distribution of committee seats, budgets and office space.
Although a tied committee vote would normally kill a measure, the power-sharing agreements allowed the Senate to vote to discharge a measure that stalled on a tie. The motion to discharge could be called up by either party leader and approved by a simple majority vote.
Although the majority leader would still control whether and when that measure would be brought up for a vote, the agreement said both leaders “shall seek to attain an equal balance of the interests of the two parties when scheduling and debating legislative and executive business generally.”
In 2001 and 2021, party leaders also struck side deals to foster more open amendment debate on bills, but neither was formalized in the power-sharing agreements and therefore was not enforceable.
It is unclear whether Mr. Schumer would negotiate the same agreement if faced with a 50-50 Senate where his party did not have a technical majority, as Democrats did in 2021.
He could try to leverage additional concessions from Republicans, such as subpoena or other oversight authorities.
Still, Mr. Schumer may not want to overplay his hand, as that could risk pushing Sen. John Fetterman, Pennsylvania Democrat, to switch parties.
On multiple occasions, Mr. Fetterman has denied any interest in becoming a Republican, but the temptation would increase in a closely divided Senate.
Mr. Fetterman has more friendships across the aisle than within his caucus and has opposed some Democratic tactics, such as using government shutdowns to leverage policy concessions.
Mr. Fetterman has also voted with Republicans in support of the Iran war and pro-Israel policies.
The past 50-50 power-sharing agreements contained a provision nullifying their effects if “either party attains a majority of the whole number of senators.”
This became an issue in May 2001, when Sen. James Jeffords of Vermont left the Republican Party and became an independent. The Senate no longer had a 50-50 split, but neither party had a majority of the 100 senators.
Mr. Frumin, who had just been promoted from assistant parliamentarian to the top role after Mr. Lott fired Senate Parliamentarian Robert Dove, said he experienced a moment of “professional agony” navigating Mr. Jeffords’ unforeseen party switch.
“I convinced his chief of staff to tell Jeffords he didn’t have to say he was a Democrat. He had to say he was caucusing with the Democrats,” he said. “For our purposes, that made him a Democrat, such that the Democrats had 51.”
Mr. Fetterman “could very well be the next Jeffords” and become an independent, Mr. Frumin said.
The former Senate parliamentarian also noted the “strange language” in the nullifying provision of the power-sharing agreement.
“It was an odd thing, speaking of a majority of the ’whole number,’” Mr. Frumin said. “Almost nothing in the Senate is based on a percentage of the ’whole number.’ It’s almost always based on a percentage of the senators duly chosen and sworn.”
He said the alternative descriptor was used “because the people who drafted that resolution thought Strom Thurmond would drop dead.”
Thurmond, South Carolina Republican, was 98 in 2001 and had he died in office, the membership of the Senate Republican Conference would have temporarily dropped to 49. That could have given Democrats the majority had Republicans not advocated for the “whole number” provision.
Neither party is likely to push for a change to the provision after an unexpected Senate death this year. Sen. Lindsey Graham, South Carolina Republican, died at age 71 from an aortic dissection.
Contact the author
Please read our comment policy before commenting.