There's several reasons. The main reason is that the majorities in both houses of Congress are razor-thin. And the coalition of special interests that make up the Democratic Party are not in lock-step agreement on how to proceed on many, if not most things. There's a lot of criticism thrown at Senators Manchin and Sinema for obstructing the President's plans, and there's plenty of stones thrown at Senator McConnell as leader of the Senate Republicans for opposing virtually everything the Democrats do. There's the argument that 81 million people voted for Joe Biden because they wanted to see his policies enacted, 7 million more than voted for Trump. That's a pretty weak argument in my view. How many of those 81 million were conservatives at heart, but couldn't stomach another four years of Donald Trump? How many were Democrats who supported other candidates in the primaries? The fact that Democrats in the House of Representatives saw a net loss of seats, with many districts seeing more votes for Biden yet still electing a Republican representative, should give one pause. My neighbors to the north in the Omaha-based District 2 gave Biden their electoral vote while returning Republican Don Bacon to Congress.
The truth is that on many issues Americans are split pretty evenly. While the filibuster is not something that is provided for in the Constitution, and it has been, and continues to be, used for nefarious purposes, do we really want a narrow majority making sweeping changes that are anathema to the narrow minority? Those of us of a more progressive mindset are frustrated at the inability to implement progressive legislation in the current Congress. But it would not take much for the tables to be turned. Currently there are 220 Democrats and 212 Republicans (plus 3 vacancies - the vacant seats were held by 2Ds and 1 R) in the House of Representatives. If just five districts flip, then the Republicans regain control of the House. Just a net change of one in the Senate and McConnell is once again in charge. Of course with a Democrat in the White House there's not much damage a Republican Congress can do, but based on McConnell's track record, you can forget about any federal judges being confirmed for the rest of Biden's term of office. But my point is that if the Republicans regain control of Congress, and even if they elect a Republican president in 2024, it will still be pretty evenly split - just with the other guys in charge.
Will we still be so against the filibuster when it's our only chance of preventing right-wing legislation from being enacted?
A counter argument is that the Republicans have no problem with playing dirty - with changing the rules when it suits them. We have seen that time and again, especially in the McConnell regime. The changing rationale for denying a president a Supreme Court nomination is a case in point. McConnell and his caucus have shown no shame in changing the rules of the game for their own benefit. Why shouldn't the Democrats take the action that the Republicans would surely take in the same situation and eliminate the filibuster in order to advance the progressive agenda. After all, they eliminated it when it looked like the filibuster would stand in the way of confirming Trump's Supreme Court nominees. The problem with that scenario is that the Democrats aren't united. Like it or not there are two Democratic Senators who lean conservative, one of whom would likely lose his seat if he voted for much of the progressive wish list. So, even if the filibuster could be killed, there's a high likelihood that 50 votes (plus Harris' tie-breaker) wouldn't be forthcoming in most cases, so it would be a meaningless gesture that would do nothing but open things up for future Republican abuse.
Look for an immediate (and even long-term) future of continued gridlock.
No comments:
Post a Comment