So there were rumors that it wasn’t just U.S. Senators Joe Machin (D. WV) and Kyrsten Sinema (D. AZ) who weren’t willing to do a carve out of the filibuster for voting rights. Supposedly, U.S. Senator Jon Tester (D. MT) wasn’t crazy about the idea:
For a caucus that prides itself on unity, there’s plenty of nuance in Democrats’ views.
Some, like Sen. Jon Tester (D-Mont.) like a talking filibuster but are “not crazy” about making an exception for voting rights. Meanwhile, Sen. Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.) says reform is needed but is promoting more modest changes. She cites the near-impossible odds the party faces in getting all 50 Democrats on board for changing the filibuster unilaterally, also known as the “nuclear option.”
Well, Senator Tester made it clear today that he’s ready to do it. From The Guardian:
Senator Jon Tester said repeatedly that the filibuster had been weaponized and bemoaned the fact that it made it possible for any one senator to essentially kill legislation and then fundraise off it.
“They have a different perspective on what the long-term impacts are,” Tester said during an event hosted by the left-leaning Center for American Progress Action Fund.
“Some of the folks in the caucus think we need to keep doing what we’ve been doing because that’s what we’ve been doing in the past,” he said.
Tester, who himself was at one point hesitant about changing the filibuster, made it clear Wednesday he supports creating a carveout from the rule for voting rights legislation.
“I do think that bipartisan is always the best. But at some point in time … you have to say this is important for democracy, important for our country, maybe the most important thing I’ll ever do for our country,” he said.
“My preferred solution is to do the filibuster change for everything. The truth is, if we need a carveout to protect voting rights. I’m there and I will do it.”
Thank you Senator Tester. Your bravery deserves our praise. The only praise Manchin and Sinema are getting is from this clown:
On the day President Joe Biden delivered a speech in Georgia advocating for amend Senate filibuster rules in order to pass voting rights legislation, Republicans argued against ensuring every American is able to participate in free and fair elections, preferring to keep laws that suppress the vote on the books.
“When it comes to protecting majority rule in America, a majority should rule in the United States Senate,” Biden said in a speech delivered in Atlanta on Tuesday. “To protect our democracy, I support changing the Senate rules to prevent a minority of senators from blocking action on voting rights.”
The GOP was ready to object. Sen. Lindsay Graham called Biden’s arguments “manufactured B.S.” and praised Democratic Sens. Joe Manchin (D-W.V.) and Kyrsten Sinema (D-Ariz.) who have so far opposed ending the filibuster. “God bless Sinema, God bless Senator Manchin. I hope they hold. I believe they will,” Graham said during an interview with far-right outlet Newsmax. The senator then said that voting rights shouldn’t be an issue because states like South Carolina “make it easy to vote.”
Greg Sargent from The Washington Post nails it with Manchin:
To his credit, Manchin is open to more modest filibuster reforms, and he has seriously engaged the debate over democracy for months. But by all indications, he and Sen. Kyrsten Sinema (D-Ariz.) will oppose that filibuster carve-out, which all but dooms passage.
Manchin has now offered a new justification for this position.
“I mean, voting is very important. It is a bedrock of democracy,” Manchin told reporters Tuesday. “But to break the opportunity for the minority to participate completely — that’s just not who we are.”
This idea, that even a temporary filibuster carve-out betrays “who we are,” essentially posits that the Senate supermajority requirement is in some sense more faithful to American liberal constitutionalism than protecting voting rights is.
This is absurd. First, the idea that nixing the filibuster would “break the opportunity for the minority to participate completely” is unintentionally revealing about Manchin’s true stance. It’s false on its face: Needing a simple majority to pass legislation doesn’t stop senators from the minority party from entering into negotiations with the majority party to try to influence said legislation.
In fact, ending the filibuster might increase the incentive for a bloc of GOP senators to seek such negotiations. Without it, bills could pass with a majority of fewer than 60 votes, meaning, say, five moderate Republicans would have more opportunities to get on legislation with a real chance of passage, burnishing their bipartisan cred while delivering for constituents. Moderate Democrats who want to be seen working with Republicans would help that happen.
What ending the filibuster actually would stop is the opportunity for the minority party to participate entirely on its own terms. With the filibuster, virtually nothing can pass. This facilitates and encourages a deliberate opposition strategy of denying the president’s party legislative victories to make the government under that party more dysfunctional.
This is the reality of the “opportunity for the minority to participate” that Manchin is personally enabling. And it actually reduces the opportunity for more bipartisan legislation to pass — the opposite of what he suggests.
Second, you know who is actually working hard to “break the opportunity of the minority to participate”? GOP-controlled state legislatures are. They are passing restrictions on voting access in many states, and they’re doing so by simple majority — on a largely partisan basis.
And kudos to EJ Montini at The Arizona Republic for calling out Sinema:
Republicans control the state Legislature and could institute such a rule any time they wished, as could any other state legislature.
But, they don’t.
Weird.
Likewise, Arizona Sen. Kyrsten Sinema has repeatedly and publicly stated her support for the Senate filibuster, even as she claims to support the voter protection bills that Republicans in the Senate are using the filibuster to block. The outdated rule requires a supermajority to pass bills.
Sinema was a member of the Arizona Legislature for a number of years, and I cannot find any reference from her days in state office when lawmakers suggested or tried to institute a filibuster rule within our state government.
Why not, if it’s such a good idea?
As it is, Arizona’s Legislature, like those in the vast majority of states, passes laws by simple majority.
In fact, many of the voter suppression bills now being passed in state legislatures all across the country, including here, are being passed by legislative bodies with no filibuster.
Now I’m going to ask to do two things next. U.S. Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D. NY) has scheduled a vote on January 17th, Martin Luther King, Jr. Day, to change the filibuster rules to allow a carve out for voting rights. If you haven’t done it yet, please do contact your Senator now. Click here.
Next, I am going to ask you to help us get a real Democratic Senate Majority this year. Click below to donate and get involved with these Democratic Senate candidates campaigns:
Pennsylvania:
John Fetterman
Conor Lamb
Val Arkoosh
Malcom Kenyatta
Wisconsin:
Mandela Barnes
Tom Nelson
Alex Lasry
Sarah Godlewski
Ohio:
Tim Ryan
Morgan Harper
North Carolina:
Cheri Beasley
Florida:
Val Demings
Missouri:
Lucas Kunce
Scott Sifton