On Sunday, Senator Joe Manchin (D-WV), a longtime defender of the filibuster, indicated he could still be open to filibuster reforms that could make it easier for Democrats to advance their legislative agenda.
In a series of television interviews, Manchin emphasized his support for the filibuster regime, which sets a 60-vote threshold for most legislative action in the Senate. But he tell Meet the press host Chuck Todd that “if you want to make [filibustering] a little more painful – let them stand there and talk – I’m willing to look at it any way. ‘
He repeated the same point elsewhere on Sunday, tells Chris Wallace on Fox News Sunday that “[the filibuster] must be painful if you want to use it. ”
Joe Manchin tells Chris Wallace that although he supports the filibuster, he thinks it “must be painful” if senators want to use it pic.twitter.com/7g3t6Vys32
– Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) 7 March 2021
This may not sound like a big deal, but it is: As Politico reporter Andrew Desiderio pointed out On Twitter Sunday, what Manchin describes appears to be a setback to the ‘talking filibuster’, which would likely be a much more insurmountable obstacle for the narrow Democratic Senate majority.
Wow – Manchin points to an openness to filibuster reform.
What he is referring to here is the ‘talking filibuster’, whereby a member of the minority party can filibuster as long as he / she remains on the floor. As soon as he / she concedes again, an ordinary majority threshold will be voted on. https://t.co/YkzdcSTXOX
– Andrew Desiderio (@AndrewDesiderio) 7 March 2021
As Desiderio explained, a ‘minority party member can be a’ talking filibuster ‘filibuster as long as he / she stays on the floor.’ But once a member has finished speaking, the filibuster will end and there will be a vote against a simple majority vote of 50 votes, instead of the existing threshold of 60 votes required to end a filibuster.
This is a big change, because there is currently no need for real filibustering in the Senate, at least not in the conventional sense. As Vox explained in 2015, the modern filibuster does not require a senator to talk on the floor for hours on end to delay a bill.
Instead, today’s filibuster is a simple step in rejecting unanimous approval for a bill that could painlessly execute the minority: According to former Vox author Ezra Klein, “Today’s filibusters simply paralyze the Senate until the majority either 60 find votes to continue, or give up and move on to another issue. ”
If this rule is changed, however, we say, by returning to the speaking filibuster of yesteryear, filibusters can only paralyze the Senate until the minority no longer wants the members.
Support for the talking filibuster is also not really a new position for Manchin, as Desiderio points out: In 2011, Manchin supported a similar, unsuccessful measure that would “require senators who want to filter a bill to actually take the floor and make comments.”
As things currently stand, the filibuster does not affect all Senate matters – judicial appointments, for example, are only subject to a simple majority of 50 votes, just like cabinet appointments – but it limits most legislation. The notable exception to the rule is the budget reconciliation process, which Democrats are about to use to apply a $ 1.9 billion stimulus package this week. But reconciliation is also an angry, limited process that would be incompatible with many democratic priorities under current congressional rules.
While this is the very thing that places a 60-vote threshold on many Senate cases, the filibuster itself is not subject to the same threshold. If the current Democratic caucus majority in the Senate – with its 50 votes, plus Vice President Kamala Harris as the equalizer – wants to eliminate the filibuster completely, he can do so.
This will not happen unless Manchin and other moderates have a dramatic change of heart – but Manchin’s comments are a reminder that Democrats can still use their majority to find a way into the filibuster if their members are not willing to. to end straight.
Filibuster changes could pave the way for a bold Democratic legislative agenda
Clearly, Manchin’s remarks Sunday are not a definite commitment to do anything to the filibuster – but it’s still very good news for the Democrats, who look set to soon get a series of futile fights for ten Republican votes. to win for priorities. such as voting rights and a minimum wage increase.
Specifically, the change in the tone of Manchin, albeit minor, comes as Senate Democrats prepare for a battle over a voting package recently adopted by the House of Representatives, and while senior party leaders fall behind .
In an interview this week, for example, Jim Clyburn, whip of the majority of the House, told the Guardian that “there is no way in 2021 to allow the filibuster to be used to deny voting rights.”
‘Here we talk about the Voting Rights Act [late Rep. John Lewis] worked so hard and it was named in his honor and are they going to kill it filibuster? Clyburn said. “It’s not going to happen.”
As a member of the House rather than the Senate, Clyburn himself has no say in the fate of the filibuster, but he is still an influential, longtime leader in Congress. And he is not alone in advocating for change: just this past week, various Senate Democrats have indicated they would also be prepared to abolish the filibuster to pave the way for priorities such as suffrage.
‼ ️ Another important one. In addition to coming from a major swing state, Stabenow is also the fourth-ranking Democratic leader of the Senate and chairman of the DPCC, the caucus’ policies and messages. And just generally considered a very smart and clever senator by her colleagues. https://t.co/N2bnjAIz89
– Adam Jentleson (@AJentleson) 6 March 2021
Despite some movement within the Democratic caucus, the path to the elimination of filibuster – or even reform – is not yet clear. Democrats would already need 50 members of their majority to make that happen, and Manchin’s comments Sunday confirmed that he is still in the ‘hard’ no camp to abolish the filibuster, as is Arizona Senator Krysten Sinema. which expressed an aggressive proponent. filibuster position.
As the Democratic Senate majority do however, decide to take action, there are many things they can do to inflate the filibuster forever. As Vox’s Ian Millhiser wrote last month, with just 50 votes and Harris to break the bond, Democrats could limit themselves to the bills subject to the filibuster, making it harder to pass a bill in the first place. filibrate, or to lower the dress threshold in the Senate. .
On Meet the press Manchin on Sunday indicated some willingness to consider the first option, in addition to a speaking filibuster, and told Todd he would be an ‘reconciliation’ approach to passing bills if Democrats repeatedly refuse Manchin’s ‘Republican friends’ to go to work. together.
According to some Democrats, such as Clyburn, changing the filibuster is essential for the future, not only for the legislative agenda of the Biden government, but also for the Democratic Party’s ability to compete in future elections.
“If Manchin and Cinema like to be in the majority,” Clyburn told the Guardian, “they better find a way around the filibuster when it comes to voting and civil rights.”