In other words, can he end up as ML in name only?
That would be an absolutely horrendous proposition.
It is not a constitutional office. It is a partisan officer, elected by members of a caucus. The rules governing it are made up by the caucus that prevails in the majority vote. Thus Daschle was "Majority Leader" when his party did not have a majority. Jeffords joined the Democratic caucus, thus enabling the Democratic "floor" or "majority" leader to manage the caucus' agenda. Go here for the Responsibilities of Majority and Minority Leaders. The Senate website defines the floor leaders' role this way:
The relations between floor leaders and their respective party memberships revolve around an exchange basis. The members of the political party having consolidated their strength elect a leader and place this power at his disposal for operation of the legislative machine to carry out the party's program. The members of the party, in return for their support, can expect the leader's assistance in meeting their individual political needs insofar as practicable. The relationship is one of compromise and mutual forbearance in order to function as a body - a common characteristic of all popularly elected legislative institutions. The leaders are in a position to help any Senator of their party in most cases where the Senator would be unable to help himself acting alone. Individual Senators often consult the leadership about the following matters: when to participate in debate, committee assignments to be sought, particular appointments desired, the passage of particular pieces of legislation, the confirmation of particular nominations and desired administrative action by the executive branch, particularly when the President and the majority in control of Congress are of the same political party. In particular, the appointment powers of the two party leaders gives them some leverage in working with the members of their respective parties.It continues with a statement relevant to our question about the functioning of a compromised or weakened floor leader:
The position of the floor leader is not that of an army general over a multitude of soldiers. Unlike army officers, the floor leaders must maintain continued support. They are subject to periodic re-election by the same persons they have been leading.And this:
The leaders are in positions to act as clearing houses for their respective party memberships as to the status of pending legislation; the majority leader commonly posts the Senate on such matters. The work with the agents of their party to secure cooperation and unity in carrying out the party's legislative program. The majority leader remains in constant touch with the chairmen of the various standing committees to keep posted on the progress of legislation. Meetings are regularly held between the leaders and Senators to resolve or clear out any conflicts which might arise over or because of pending proposed legislation.What goes unsaid in all this is that the floor leader controls the management of legislation, be it the flow of bills to Committees, schedules for votes, and timing and direction of debate. Until "cloture" was enacted in 1917, Senate floor debate was unlimited, which was until then considered sacred. Previously, a Senator could go on forever. Cloture was the mechanism to regain control of debate that was being manipulated by some or even just one Senator (such as endlessly reciting Shakespeare or reading the phone book in order to hold up debate; each Senator is allowed a single statement, and can make it as exhaustively as he wants). Originally, a 2/3rds vote was required to close debate, thus "cloture." The needed majority was amended to 3/5ths in the 1970s. Go here for an explanation.
The principal power the majority floor leader wields is the order and timing of consideration of a bill. The same power is given to Committee chairmen. Committees are more powerful in the Senate than in the House, for in the House the "Committee as a Whole" can consider a bill, whereas the Senate funnels such discussion to the Committees and gives them greater control over a bill's entry to the entire body. That is to say, in the House, a Committee is more easily overruled by a majority vote than in the Senate.
What this all means is that a simple majority defines Committee appointments, schedules, and considerations. Herein is the principal power of the floor leader. Once a debate has moved to the floor, a 3/5ths majority is needed to move to a final vote. To conclude, the Majority Leader requires the cooperation of the caucus and, especially, the Committee Chairs, in order to maintain control over the flow of business. Without it, the Majority Leader has nothing. With it, he has everything, except, as discussed, final dispositions, which require cloture.
I hope that makes sense. Let me know if I've gotten any of this wrong.
If Majority Leader Lott wants to diss the President, he'll have to caucus with the Democrats. Otherwise, he's stuck playing the majority's game. That is, for revenge, he has to oppose the President openly.
As I said before, if Lott stays, he's Bush's gal.