This update (follows some background) is on the Senate Filibuster rule and the need for reform or repeal comes from The Guardian.
But first this background look at that rule
and recent events therein:
Background on how we
got to this point from the NY
TIMES – April 6, 2017):
— Senate Republicans “nuked”
the long-standing precedent requiring 60 votes to end filibusters of Supreme
Court nominees in order to push through President Trump’s Supreme Court
nominee, Neil Gorsuch.
Most Democrats joined a
filibuster of the nominee, arguing that he was outside of the legal mainstream
and that Republicans owed them a “consensus” nominee after they blocked a
hearing on former President Barack Obama’s nominee Merrick Garland last year.
The first vote to end
debate on Gorsuch failed, 55 to 45 with just four Democrats joining Republicans
to end a filibuster.
Then, Republicans nuked
the precedent on a party-line vote, 52 to 48.
GOP Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) was always clear that he would change the precedent of the Senate if Democrats refused to allow a vote on Gorsuch.
It took only 51 votes to change the rule requiring 60 senators to agree to end debate on a Supreme Court nominee. With the rules changed, it now also takes only 51 votes for the Senate to end a filibuster and proceed to a floor vote to confirm a nominee.
“We need to restore the norms and
traditions of the Senate and get past this unprecedented partisan filibuster,”
McConnell said on the floor, before starting the process of going nuclear.
Senate Democrats may still demand 30 hours of debate before the final vote, which is now expected.
The battle over changing the rules caused much handwringing in the Senate, which prides itself on being more deliberative and bipartisan than the rowdier House. Some Senate Republicans, such as now former Sen. Bob Corker (R-TN) argued this was a step that could “destroy” the Senate, and possibly lead the body to also change its rules and only require 51 votes to end debate on legislation, as well. That would mean a majority party could quickly push through bills, instead of requiring some buy-in from the other side. McConnell said that not a single member of his caucus would vote to change the legislative filibuster, since it makes the Senate the Senate.
Republicans blame Democrats because they eliminated the
filibuster for lower-court judges in 2013 and because they blocked Gorsuch.
The Colorado jurist’s backers note that he attracted some
support from liberal lawyers and is widely viewed as qualified for the job.
Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) said in a floor
speech before the cloture vote that he believed the blame should be apportioned
more on Republicans than Democrats, in part said: “We believe that what the Republicans
did to Merrick Garland was worse than a filibuster, declaring mere hours after
Justice Scalia’s death that they would deny the constitutional prerogative of a
president with 11 months of his term left. In a post nuclear world if the
Senate and the presidency are in the hands of the same party there’s no
incentive to even speak to the Senate minority. That is a recipe for more
conflict and bad blood between the parties, not less.”
Sen. Joe Manchin (D-WV) and one of a handful of Democrats who said he would vote to end a filibuster on Gorsuch, criticized the “hypocrisy of both sides” in a statement right before the vote — saying both parties are sticking to “talking points” instead of trying to fix the situation adding: “This is precisely what is wrong with Washington, and if it happens, both Democrats and Republicans will bear the shame.”
Sen. Richard Durbin (D-IL) said on the Senate floor: “The
nuclear option was used by Senator McConnell when he stopped Merrick Garland.
What we face today is the fallout. What Republicans did to Obama's nominee
Garland was worse than a filibuster, and they denied the constitutional
prerogative of a president with 11 months left in his term (just as Sen.
Schumer also said).”
McConnell blamed the escalation of fights over judicial
nominees on the Democrats and their opposition starting three decades ago to
nominees made by Republican former Presidents Ronald Reagan and George W. Bush.
McConnell called the Democratic effort against Gorsuch “another
extreme escalation in the left's never-ending drive to politicize the court and
the confirmation process.” He accused Gorsuch's opponents of “a singular aim:
securing raw power no matter the cost to the country or the institution.”
The 60-vote threshold that gives the minority party power to
hold up the majority party has forced the Senate over the decades to try to
achieve bipartisanship in legislation and presidential appointments.
The filibuster in one form or another dates back to the 19th
century but assumed its current form in the 1970s.
While Democrats opposed
the rule change and accused Republicans of a power grab, it was the Democrats
who first resorted to the nuclear option when they controlled the Senate in
2013.
They barred filibusters
for executive branch nominees and federal judges aside from Supreme Court
justices but still allowed it for Supreme Court nominees and legislation.
The Republican-backed rule
change maintains the ability to filibuster legislation.
In the past, the nuclear
option has been averted when moderates in the two parties compromised to avoid
a showdown, but the ferocious partisanship in Washington now (today) has made
that impossible.
Now the post for today from The
Guardian April 29, 2021 with this headline:
“Why a filibuster showdown in the
US Senate is unavoidable”
The full story:
Amanda Litman, the executive director of the Run for
Something, a group that recruits candidates for state legislative races said she
thinks some Democrats still don’t fully appreciate how dangerous and
consequential the GOP’s ongoing efforts saying: “This is really an existential
crisis. It’s a five-alarm fire. But I’m not sure it’s quite sunk in for members
of the United States Senate or the Democratic Party writ large,” then she added: “If
the Senate does not kill the filibuster and pass voting rights reforms …
Democrats are going to lose control of the House and likely the Senate forever.
You don’t put these worms back into a can. You can’t undo this quite easily.”
Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-NY), Democratic leader in the Senate, last
week set August as a deadline for Democrats to pass their
sweeping voting rights bill, which would require early voting, automatic and
same-day registration, among other measures.
Ron Klain, Biden’s chief of staff, said the White House supports that effort. But the window for Democrats to have the most impact with their legislation is rapidly closing. The decennial process of redrawing district lines is set to take place later this year, and a critical portion of the Democratic bill would set new limits to prevent state lawmakers, who have the power to draw the maps, from severely manipulating districts for partisan gain.
While it’s probably already too late to set up
independent redistricting commissions for this year, Democrats could still pass
rules to prevent the most severe partisan manipulation.
Michael Li, a redistricting expert at the Brennan Center for
Justice at NYU said: “You could pass new criteria, including a ban on partisan
gerrymandering...require greater transparency in the process. There’s a lot
that could be done.”
Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-MN), Chair of the Senate Committee now considering the filibuster rule change, was asked what kind of message it would send if Democrats failed to take any action to protect voting rights while they held the reins of government and she said: “Failure is not an option,” then adding: “This is our very democracy that’s at stake. I’m not gonna let some old senate rule get in the way of that.”
My 2 cents: I totally
agree that the senate filibuster rule needs to be changed (modified to allow
members to sound off and protest or whatever), but it should be limited and
then only a simple majority can shut it off and bills also can move forward and
be passed with a majority vote – in our country, the majority rules, while
giving the minority a voice but not the voice of one or two Senators to stop
sorely needed bills to be passed.
Let the minority be heard
reasonably and then the majority takes control – the way it should and must be.
That is the American the way and I’m pretty sure most others feel the same way.
A few stubborn hardheaded arrogant Senators should not be able to dictate and
run things not now; now ever.
Thanks for stopping by and
make sure your voice is heard, too anyway possible.
Footnote from the article’s
author also worth watching:
1. Sam Levine, the author of this Guardian article, and his
colleague, Tom Perkins, reported on a particularly anti-democratic effort
underway in MI, where Republicans have already hinted they plan to utilize a
little-used maneuver to get around a gubernatorial veto and enact voting
restrictions.
2. The U.S. Census Bureau announced its long-awaited apportionment totals on
Monday that determine which states gain and lose seats in Congress. CO, MT, OR,
NC, and FL will all gain one seat. TX will add two and CA, IL, MI, NY, OH, PA,
and WV West Virginia will all lose one seat.
No comments:
Post a Comment