{"id":4885,"date":"2021-04-07T11:49:51","date_gmt":"2021-04-07T11:49:51","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/lonecandle.com\/?p=4885"},"modified":"2021-04-07T11:49:51","modified_gmt":"2021-04-07T11:49:51","slug":"how-joe-manchin-can-make-the-filibuster-more-painful-for-the-gop-without-eliminating-it","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/lonecandle.com\/?p=4885","title":{"rendered":"How Joe Manchin can make the filibuster \u201cmore painful\u201d for the GOP without eliminating it"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

\n\n“In 1805, fresh off the duel where he killed Alexander Hamilton, Vice President Aaron Burr returned to the Senate and proposed streamlining the body\u2019s rules by eliminating something called the \u201cprevious question motion<\/a>,\u201d a process that was rarely invoked in the early years of the Senate<\/a>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

As Sarah Binder, a Brookings Institution expert on Congress and a professor at George Washington University, explained in 2010 testimony to the Senate Rules Committee, Burr\u2019s intent was to produce a \u201ccleaner rule book<\/a>\u201d that wasn\u2019t too thick with duplicative procedures. And he thought the previous question motion was the kind of superfluous rule that could be eliminated.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Unfortunately for the nation, the previous question motion wasn\u2019t the least bit superfluous. This motion turned out to be the only way to force the Senate to move off a particular topic. When the Senate took up Burr on his call, it allowed senators to lock the Senate into endless, pointless debate \u2014 halting progress even if a majority of the Senate wished to move forward to a vote.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The filibuster was born.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Since then, the rules permitting filibusters have been changed many times \u2014 and with increasing frequency.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In 1917, President Woodrow Wilson successfully urged the Senate to create a process, known as \u201ccloture,\u201d which would allow a two-thirds majority of the Senate to break a filibuster<\/a> and bring a matter to the Senate for a final vote. The number of votes necessary to end a filibuster, whether on a piece of legislation or on a confirmation vote, was reduced to three-fifths of the Senate<\/a> (ordinarily 60 votes ) in 1975.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In the 1970s, Congress created a process known as \u201cbudget reconciliation<\/a>,\u201d which allows many taxing and spending bills to become law with a simple majority vote, bypassing the filibuster. In 1996, Congress enacted the Congressional Review Act<\/a>, which allows Congress to overturn recent federal agency regulations without having to deal with the filibuster.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

And in the present-day Senate, filibuster reforms have beenenacted fairly often. In 2011, a narrow Senate majority voted to strip away some of the minority\u2019s power<\/a> to force votes on amendments to a bill.In 2013, the Senate enacted a temporary measure that limited the minority\u2019s ability to delay confirmation votes<\/a> once the Senate agreed to end debate on a particular nominee, and a version of this rule was made permanent in 2019<\/a> (though nothing is truly permanent because a future Senate could always change this rule again). The Senate voted to allow non-Supreme Court nominees to be confirmed with a simple majority vote in 2013<\/a>, and it voted to allow Supreme Court justices to be confirmed<\/a> by a simple majority in 2017.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Indeed, this brief account of the filibuster\u2019s history drastically undersells how often Congress creates exceptions. In her book Exceptions to the Rule: The Politics of Filibuster Limitations in the US Senate<\/em><\/a>, the Brookings Institution\u2019s Molly Reynolds writes that \u201ca careful review of the historical record has identified 161\u201d provisions of law that prevent \u201csome future piece of legislation from being filibustered on the floor of the Senate.\u201d This includes legislation fast-tracking votes on trade negotiations, expediting votes on military base closures, and allowing Congress to bypass the filibuster for certain regulatory and budgetary matters.”<\/p>\n\n\n\n

…<\/p>\n\n\n\n

“there are four broad ways that senators can weaken the filibuster without eliminating it altogether.”<\/p>\n\n\n\n

“Make fewer bills subject to the filibuster”<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

“<\/strong>Reduce the power of individual rogue senators: <\/strong>The Senate could make it harder to initiate a filibuster. Right now, unanimous consent is required to hold a vote without invoking the time-consuming cloture process. But the rules could be changed to allow an immediate vote unless a larger bloc of senators \u2014 perhaps two or five or 10 \u2014 objected to such a vote, instead of just one.”<\/p>\n\n\n\n

“Make it easier to break a filibuster”<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

“<\/strong>Reduce or eliminate the time it takes to invoke cloture:<\/strong> The Senate could reduce the amount of time necessary to invoke cloture and conduct a final vote. This could be done by allowing a swifter vote on a cloture petition, by reducing or eliminating the time devoted to post-closure debate, or both.”<\/p>\n\n\n\n

https:\/\/www.vox.com\/22260164\/filibuster-senate-fix-reform-joe-manchin-kyrsten-sinema-cloture-mitch-mcconnell<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

“In 1805, fresh off the duel where he killed Alexander Hamilton, Vice President Aaron Burr returned to the Senate and proposed streamlining the body\u2019s rules by eliminating something called the \u201cprevious question motion,\u201d a process that was rarely invoked in the early years of the Senate.<\/p>\n

As Sarah Binder, a Brookings Institution expert on Congress and a professor at George Washington University, explained in 2010 testimony to the Senate Rules Committee, Burr\u2019s intent was to produce a \u201ccleaner rule book\u201d that wasn\u2019t too thick with duplicative procedures. And he thought the previous question motion was the kind of superfluous rule that could be eliminated.<\/p>\n

Unfortunately for the nation, the previous question motion wasn\u2019t the least bit superfluous. This motion turned out to be the only way to force the Senate to move off a particular topic. When the Senate took up Burr on his call, it allowed senators to lock the Senate into endless, pointless debate \u2014 halting progress even if a majority of the Senate wished to move forward to a vote.<\/p>\n

The filibuster was born.<\/p>\n

Since then, the rules permitting filibusters have been changed many times \u2014 and with increasing frequency.<\/p>\n

In 1917, President Woodrow Wilson successfully urged the Senate to create a process, known as \u201ccloture,\u201d which would allow a two-thirds majority of the Senate to break a filibuster and bring a matter to the Senate for a final vote. The number of votes necessary to end a filibuster, whether on a piece of legislation or on a confirmation vote, was reduced to three-fifths of the Senate (ordinarily 60 votes ) in 1975.<\/p>\n

In the 1970s, Congress created a process known as \u201cbudget reconciliation,\u201d which allows many taxing and spending bills to become law with a simple majority vote, bypassing the filibuster. In 1996, Congress enacted the Congressional Review Act, which allows Congress to overturn recent federal agency regulations without having to deal with the filibuster.<\/p>\n

And in the present-day Senate, filibuster reforms have been enacted fairly often. In 2011, a narrow Senate majority voted to strip away some of the minority\u2019s power to force votes on amendments to a bill. In 2013, the Senate enacted a temporary measure that limited the minority\u2019s ability to delay confirmation votes once the Senate agreed to end debate on a particular nominee, and a version of this rule was made permanent in 2019 (though nothing is truly permanent because a future Senate could always change this rule again). The Senate voted to allow non-Supreme Court nominees to be confirmed with a simple majority vote in 2013, and it voted to allow Supreme Court justices to be confirmed by a simple majority in 2017.<\/p>\n

Indeed, this brief account of the filibuster\u2019s history drastically undersells how often Congress creates exceptions. In her book Exceptions to the Rule: The Politics of Filibuster Limitations in the US Senate, the Brookings Institution\u2019s Molly Reynolds writes that \u201ca careful review of the historical record has identified 161\u201d provisions of law that prevent \u201csome future piece of legislation from being filibustered on the floor of the Senate.\u201d This includes legislation fast-tracking votes on trade negotiations, expediting votes on military base closures, and allowing Congress to bypass the filibuster for certain regulatory and budgetary matters.”<\/p>\n

…<\/p>\n

“there are four broad ways that senators can weaken the filibuster without eliminating it altogether.”<\/p>\n

“Make fewer bills subject to the filibuster”<\/p>\n

“Reduce the power of individual rogue senators: The Senate could make it harder to initiate a filibuster. Right now, unanimous consent is required to hold a vote without invoking the time-consuming cloture process. But the rules could be changed to allow an immediate vote unless a larger bloc of senators \u2014 perhaps two or five or 10 \u2014 objected to such a vote, instead of just one.”<\/p>\n

“Make it easier to break a filibuster”<\/p>\n

“Reduce or eliminate the time it takes to invoke cloture: The Senate could reduce the amount of time necessary to invoke cloture and conduct a final vote. This could be done by allowing a swifter vote on a cloture petition, by reducing or eliminating the time devoted to post-closure debate, or both.”<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_monsterinsights_skip_tracking":false,"_monsterinsights_sitenote_active":false,"_monsterinsights_sitenote_note":"","_monsterinsights_sitenote_category":0,"footnotes":""},"categories":[13],"tags":[542,964,1172,906,865],"class_list":["post-4885","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-article-share","tag-congress","tag-filibuster","tag-joe-manchin","tag-legislation","tag-senate"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/lonecandle.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/4885","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/lonecandle.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/lonecandle.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/lonecandle.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/lonecandle.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=4885"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/lonecandle.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/4885\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":4886,"href":"https:\/\/lonecandle.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/4885\/revisions\/4886"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/lonecandle.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=4885"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/lonecandle.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=4885"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/lonecandle.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=4885"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}