National overview
Joe Biden was right in the Filibuster for the first time
Americans who hoped that the alleged “moderate” President Biden would take action against his party over something concrete will have to wait a little longer. After reaffirming yesterday afternoon that he still prefers the senate filibuster, the president told George Stephanopoulos last night that he can now change his mind. At the very least, Biden suggested, the filibuster should be amended so that senators should continue to speak in order to maintain it. Why? Because ‘democracy works hard.’ Is that so? And if so, when did it start? All in all, there is an inevitable scent of ‘for me, but not for you’ about the Democratic Party’s approach to the Senate’s rules. Biden served three and a half decades in the upper chamber, during which he enthusiastically participated in countless filibusters. Looking back on his career in 2005, Biden suggested that one of the most important lessons he learned in 1975 was that, even when considering minor rule changes (in that case, reducing the threshold from 67 to 60), any ‘rules changed by a simple majority vote are’ deceived ‘. “The Senate,” Biden said, “should not act hastily by changing its rules to satisfy a strong willed majority acting in the heat of the moment.” After leaving the Vice President’s office in 2017, Biden persisted in this belief and looked at it with satisfaction when his party used the filibuster to advance most of the Trump agenda and said during last year’s presidential election that ‘ the termination of the filibuster a very dangerous move. It is strange that Biden, after becoming president, only now believes that a simple majority should change the rules. Alas, Biden is not alone in his overnight conversion. Unlike Mitch McConnell and his Republican counterparts, who resisted President Trump’s intense anti-filibuster pressure, the Democratic Party nearly folded into a man within seven weeks. In 2017, 31 of the 48 senators speaking to Democrats – including figures such as Kamala Harris, Ed Markey, Mazie Hirono and Cory Booker – signed a bipartisan letter expressing their opposition to “any attempt to undermine the existing rights and privileges of Senators. in the full, robust and extensive debate. ”With the launch of the letter, which eventually received more than 60 signatures, its co-author Senator Collins defended it as an important tradition of the Senate that upholds the rights of the minority recognizes. “” Perhaps she should have added a few extra words: “even though the minority is Republican.” Aside from the principle, the timing of Biden’s change is strategically questionable. The Senate is currently divided into 50-50 parties, and the vice president is breaking any ties. The House is as closely divided as it has been in decades. Democrats are already struggling at 50 gaining votes – a problem that is likely to only grow as the honeymoon phase subsides, it will only take a single death or retirement in the Democratic caucus to make the move against the filibuster dangerous or too much.And that is the Democratic Party , not the Republican Party, which recently benefited from the guarantees given to the minority In 2017, despite having an absolute Senate majority and a long list of priorities, Mitch McConnell instinctively understood that the pendulum can swing fast and that the best legislative rules make an inventory of it.Can’t Chuck Schumer resist like McConnell? Of course, passions in our politics are currently particularly h eye. It was, of course, precisely for such moments that our patchwork quilt of checks and scales was devised. At such times, presidents should reflect their position as the only nationally elected player in the system and remind the country of its long-term commitments. Joe Biden once enjoyed playing the role in the Senate, while having to warn prospective reformers of the filibuster in strict terms: I have been in the Senate for a long time and there are many times that I would like to change this rule or that arrange to pass a bill or to confirm a nominee, I felt strongly. But I did not, and it was understood that the option to do so was simply not on the table. You fought political battles; you fought hard; but you fought them within the requirements of the Senate rules. Despite the short-term pain, this notion served both parties well and yielded long-term gains. The adoption of the “core option” would change this fundamental understanding and uninterrupted use of the Senate. Now, if his influence is as great as it’s ever going to be, Biden seems increasingly willing to join the crowd to limit or end the filibuster. There are many words for such an approach, but leadership is not one of them.