As unemployment continues to skyrocket, the housing market continues to fall and consumers remain reluctant to open their pocketbooks, economists are now urging a package more to the tune of $1 trillion. In a statement set to be unveiled later today, more than 100 economists will make their case why President-elect Barack Obama should back at least $900 billion in stimulus spending over the next two years.

Obama is on board with the concept, saying repeatedly that his first act from the White House will be a huge spending program focused on state infrastructure projects and renewable energy technologies. But he hasn’t yet put a dollar figure on his plan.

Even without the new stimulus bill, the federal deficit is expected to hover near $1 trillion next year, due largely to the long string of Wall Street bailouts already orchestrated by Washington. It gives new meaning to the Keynesian theory that borrowing is the best way to pull through a recession.

Then again, at least we’ll sleep better knowing that bridge we’re driving over isn’t set to collapse.

Sen. Saxby Chambliss (R-Georgia) dashed Democratic hopes for a filibuster-proof majority.

With the reelection victory of Georgia Republican Sen. Saxby Chambliss in a special election last week, hopes that Democrats would command a filibuster-proof 60-seat majority in the upper chamber next year were dashed.

The number 60 has attracted enormous attention because it represents the votes required to defeat a filibuster in the Senate — the dreaded tactic that allows opponents of a bill to kill it by debating it ad infinitum. If they had secured 60 seats Nov. 4, Democrats could have prevented Republican filibusters and had their way legislatively.

Illustration by: Matt Mahurin

But many experts on Congress have a message for Democratic leaders: The failure to get 60 members probably won’t matter.

“[It's] insignificant,” said Michael L. Mezey, political science professor at DePaul University. “There are very few straight party-line votes on cloture, on cutting off debate … This whole 60-Democrat argument has been really overblown.”

GOP leaders have used the filibuster with great success since 2006, when Democrats won a slim 51-49 advantage (including two independents who caucus with the Democrats) in the Senate. House Democrats passed a long list of party priorities — including slashing carbon emissions and protecting journalists’ rights — only to see the legislation filibustered to death by Republican senators.

The goal of picking up nine additional Senate seats in the November elections was a rallying cry for Democratic supporters eager to end what they saw as two years of GOP obstructionism. Chambliss’ win in Georgia means that Democrats, at best, could muster 59 votes next year. The Senate contest in Minnesota remains too close to call.

No president has enjoyed a filibuster-proof Senate majority since Jimmy Carter.

Many of the experts contend that the Democrats’ belief that securing 60 seats would have been the key to legislative success ignores the regional and ideological nuances that influence voting patterns on both sides of the aisle. So much media attention has been focused on the entrenched partisanship on Capitol Hill that it has been easy to forget the handful of moderates who frequently cross party lines on a wide range of controversial issues and determine legislative outcomes.

Sens. Olympia Snowe and Susan Collins, both Republicans from Maine, have a long history of bucking their party to support such Democratic causes as expanding health coverage and protecting the environment. Pennsylvania Sen. Arlen Specter is another moderate Republican who, in avidly supporting government-funded stem cell research, has defied the Bush administration. Specter has also voted with Democrats on bills battling pay discrimination and strengthening workers’ rights.

There are others. Sen. John McCain (Ariz.) has backed Democratic bills to reform immigration policy. More famously, he was also the chief sponsor of a successful effort — wildly unpopular among Republicans — to limit the influence of campaign contributions in elections.

If these and other GOP moderates support him, President-elect Barack Obama could build early political momentum next year by putting together a string of big legislative victories.

Obama says he plans first to tackle an enormous economic stimulus package that would pump hundreds of billions of dollars into infrastructure projects and social programs. House Democrats passed a similar, though much smaller stimulus bill in September. It was killed in the Senate by a Republican filibuster, but Snowe, Collins and Specter all voted for it, as did moderate Minnesota GOP Sen. Norm Coleman, who might be back next year as well.

Even with 60 seats in the Senate, Democrats would not be assured of victories on everything. Connecticut Sen. Joseph Lieberman, an independent who tends to vote Democratic but became a pariah in the eyes of Democrats after endorsing McCain for president this year, has been a loud supporter of the Iraq war, voting consistently with Republicans against Democratic efforts to withdraw troops.

And Louisiana Sen. Mary Landrieu, a hawkish Democrat, has alienated many liberals with her votes on the war. Her push to expand offshore drilling in the Gulf of Mexico angered environmentalists.

The Progressive Patriots, a liberal group that rates lawmakers’ voting records, grades Landrieu a 19 — meaning she’s voted in support of progressive bills just 19 percent of the time.

This kind of cross-party voting undercuts the significance of a 60-seat majority for either party.

“On most issues, [Democrats] would have had to get some Republicans anyway,” Mezey said.

The current economic turmoil might help the party overcome its failure to secure 60 upper-chamber seats. Former GOP Sen. Lincoln Chafee (R.I.) said the deepening recession could force Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) and other GOP leaders on Capitol Hill to abandon their filibuster strategy for fear of alienating a public already angry at years of partisan bickering.

“The party’s discipline has been so strong, but with the country in such bad shape, I’m not sure that discipline can remain,” said Chafee, a visiting scholar at Brown University. “[Republicans] can’t keep losing seats. And if you look at 2010, I don’t see any vulnerable Democrats. They [Republican leaders] will probably have to change their behavior.”

One Republican who might become receptive to the Democratic appeals is Ohio Sen. George Voinovich, who faces reelection in 2010. With Ohio suffering disproportionately from the economic downturn, Voinovich has been one of the few GOP senators to jump on board the Democrats’ plans to bail out Detroit’s sputtering auto industry — a show of support that will likely continue if the economy continues to tank.

“Voinovich will be under a lot of pressure not to obstruct things,” Mezey said.

There are still weeks to go before Democrats can begin to enjoy their newly expanded Senate majority. As party leaders prepare this week to push through a bailout package for Detroit, some Republican opponents are already vowing to filibuster it.

Senate Leader Harry Reid and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi. (flickr)

In the wake of Tuesday’s elections — which swept a Democrat into the White House and widened the party’s margins in the Senate and the House — it’s tempting to conclude that the Democrats’ legislative challenges just eased, that the days of GOP obstructionism are over and that the party’s congressional leaders will have their way next year on Capitol Hill.

It would also be misleading.

As Democratic leaders shift their energies from electoral politics to policy choices, they’re in for no cakewalk. Internally, the party will probably move toward the center, as many of Tuesday’s congressional gains came in conservative-leaning regions. Republicans, meanwhile, are vowing to unite ideologically to thwart Democratic plans, largely in fear that 2010 could be a repeat of 2008.

Illustration by: Matt Mahurin

Most important, the country is broke. It is using borrowed money to fight two long-running wars and to address the worst economic downturn in 80 years. On Friday, the news got worse. The Labor Dept. reported that roughly 240,000 people lost their jobs in October, pushing the unemployment rate to 6.5 percent, the highest in 14 years.

Still, besides their greater majorities, Democrats have accumulated a good sum of political capital in the wake of the vastly unpopular Bush administration. The problem is that their ambitious priorities don’t come cheap. Proposals to expand health coverage, cut taxes for middle-class workers and revamp the energy industry to produce a greener 21st century would benefit the economy over the long run. But they would cost billions of dollars now. Some economists anticipate a budget deficit near $1 trillion next year even without these items.

So Democratic congressional leaders will have to pick their battles carefully.

“Those are the two 800-pound gorillas (two wars and the economic downturn) that you’ll have to address before you get around to doing many other things,” said Michael L. Mezey, political science professor at DePaul University. “The budget debate is going to be front and center.”

Last week, President-elect Barack Obama laid out his domestic priorities, including sweeping plans for energy and health-care reform. Yet nothing will be possible if the economy continues to tank. On Saturday, Obama urged more government intervention to reinvigorate the economy.

“We need a rescue plan for the middle class that invests in immediate efforts to create jobs and provides relief to families that are watching their paychecks shrink and their life savings disappear,” Obama said.

Democrats want to pump billions into infrastructure projects, unemployment benefits and help for states, many of which face severe budget deficits. Party leaders hope to pass legislation this month, but the Bush administration has opposed any such plan. It’s unclear who will win the partisan battle. Obama, however, has vowed to make an economic-stimulus bill his first priority in January if Congress fails to act this year.

With Democrats having picked up at least six seats in the Senate and 19 in the House, a stimulus plan should pass easily. Yet numbers are not the only factor determining the success of the Democrats’ agenda.

Many newly elected Democrats represent moderate or conservative-leaning districts, and they tend to favor balanced budgets. These Democrats may oppose big-ticket reforms if they require more deficit spending. Membership in the House’s Blue Dog coalition — fiscally conservative Democrats — now stands at 47, but that figure could grow with the arrival of 2009’s freshman class. As federal revenues fall because of the sinking economy, the burden on Congress to find precious dollars without cutting vital services will only get heavier.

Much will also depend on Obama’s working relationship with congressional leaders, particularly House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.). If the new president doesn’t consult Congress on his agenda — the way President Bill Clinton did with his health-care reform in the early 1990s — he could face push-back from his own party.

“It’s a matter of melding their priorities with Obama’s priorities,” Mezey said, referring to Reid and Pelosi. “The question is whether there’s a willingness on both sides to find common ground.”

On many party plans, Obama and congressional leaders are on the same page. Yet sticking points remain.

Take energy issues. Reid, for example, opposes greater reliance on coal as an energy source. Obama has pushed hard for what he calls clean-coal technologies. (Illinois is a large coal producer.)

Obama also wants to increase fuel-efficiency standards for the nation’s automobiles — a goal almost certain to be opposed by Michigan’s powerful Democrats.

Then there’s this paradox: While wider congressional margins should make it easier for Democrats to carry the legislative day, greater numbers also increase the chances of dissension. “It’s always easier to have discipline with a minority party,” Mezey said. “As you widen the tent, it’s going to be very difficult to maintain the same level of unity.”

To help their chances, Democratic leaders have been quick to reach across the aisle. In a news conference Wednesday, Pelosi vowed to work next year “in a strong bipartisan way and with civility in our debate.”

No amount of civility, though, will probably curb the ubiquitous influence of lobbyists, who tend to care much less about party affiliation than who holds power. For example, there has been a strong push among some Democrats to reform the credit card industry. In September, the House passed a bill to do just that. But in the Senate, the legislation remains mired in the banking committee.

The stalemate may be due to the fact that the finance industry is the single greatest contributor to Washington lawmakers regardless of party — a trend that’s not about to change just because more Democrats will be arriving on Capitol Hill in January.

“It’s less partisan than it is the tremendous industry influence treading on a committee,” said Ed Mierzwinski, program director of the U.S. Public Interest Research Group, a consumer advocacy organization.

Republicans, meanwhile, are down but not out. In an Op-Ed in The Washington Post Friday, House Minority Leader John Boehner (R-Ohio) said the GOP is ready to fight the Democrats’ “far-left agenda.”

“This election was neither a referendum in favor of the left’s approach to key issues nor a mandate for big government,” Boehner wrote. “Obama campaigned by masking liberal policies with moderate rhetoric to make his agenda more palatable to voters. Soon he will seek to advance these policies through a Congress that was purchased by liberal special interests such as unions, trial lawyers and radical environmentalists, and he’ll have a fight on his hands when he does so.”

Obama seems to recognize the Herculean task he faces. In his victory speech Tuesday night, the president-elect pointed to the many issues plaguing the country — crumbling infrastructure, rising unemployment, war in Iraq and skyrocketing health-care costs. He asked the nation for its patience and sacrifice as he attempts to tackle them.

“The road ahead will be long,” Obama told the crowd in Grant Park. “Our climb will be steep. We may not get there in one year or even in one term.

“But, America, I have never been more hopeful than I am tonight that we will get there.”