Democrats, increasingly hopeful they can retake the White House and Senate in November, are discussing changing the Senate rules to pass legislation with a simple majority vote.
Known as the “nuclear option,” the move to remove the 60-vote threshold currently needed to end the debate in a full Senate would allow a Joe Biden administration, and a Democrat-led Congress, to act quickly on key party priorities. , including the climate change, voting rights and arms control, with only 51 votes.
The former vice president, who spent 36 years in the Senate, may have recently expressed more interest in considering it, and that it could have significant implications for the government.
“If Biden wins, one of the most important discussions he will have with Schumer and Pelosi is whether or not he will pull the trigger,” James Manley, a former Democratic Senate leadership assistant, said of the rule change. “The pressure from the base is going to be so strong, the demands are going to be so repressed that they will have to make their move sooner rather than later.”
For decades, the 60-vote threshold has been a mechanism to facilitate compromise between parties in the Senate, and served as one of several controls to distinguish the House from the House of Representatives.
But a growing number of Democrats have been frustrated by the procedural hurdle, which has hampered repeated efforts to push gun control and comprehensive immigration reform in recent years.
While the Senate was conceived as a place to “cool” the House’s legislative actions, just as a saucer is meant to cool hot tea, according to an alleged comment attributed to George Washington, “there is a big difference between a refrigerating saucer and a deep freeze, “Sen. Jeff Merkley, D-Oregon, who leads intraparty discussions on the issue, told ABC News.
Critics of the potential change have warned that ending the filibuster would lead to one side voiding the other’s legislation every time Senate control changes.
“The important thing that our Democratic friends must remember is that you may not be in full control in the future and every time you start playing by the Senate rules, I think you should always put yourself in the other teammate’s shoes and imagine what it could happen when the winds change, “Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, a Republican from Kentucky, recently said.
“If we eliminate the filibuster, you can forget about bipartisanship for a long time,” said Bill Hoagland, senior vice president of the Center for Bipartisan Policy, who served as former Republican Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist of Tennessee.
Senator Joe Manchin, D-WV, one of the more conservative members of the Democratic caucus, echoed those concerns on Twitter, warning that it could lead to more partisanship.
Both sides have reduced the filibuster in recent years.
In 2013, Democrats, led by Reid, used the nuclear option in all nominations except the Supreme Court, in response to what Democrats said was an unprecedented Republican blockade of President Barack Obama’s nominees to the administration. and the federal bank.
Four years later, Republicans cited that precedent when they eliminated the filibuster in the Supreme Court elections to confirm Neil Gorsuch, President Donald Trump’s first candidate for the highest court in the nation. In 2019, the Senate rules were also changed to limit debate on certain nominees, allowing the chamber to act on more nominations.
Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, a Democrat from New York, who is about to lead the Democrats if they retake the chamber, once suggested that Democrats would reimpose the three-fifths threshold to end the debate on the Supreme Court nominations after Gorsuch’s confirmation.
But last year he did not rule out rethinking the legislative filibuster, telling reporters “nothing is off the table” at a press conference last July.
Biden repeatedly defended the filibuster as a senator, although he changed his tune when he joined the Obama administration.
In 2005, he opposed the Republican Party’s efforts in 2005 to lower the threshold for judicial nominations, calling the proposal a “naked takeover.” But as vice president, he supported Reid’s move to make the same change.
In the 2020 primaries, he was one of several candidates who opposed eliminating the filibuster, who was backed by Sens. Kamala Harris, D-Calif., And Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass, who are on the run to join to your ticket as vice president.
“There are several areas where you can come to a consensus that relates to things like cancer and healthcare and a whole range of things. I think we can come to a consensus about it and get it passed without changing the rule. of the filibuster, “he told the New York Times Editorial Board in January.
Now, as he works to unite the Democrats, Biden suggested he would be open to considering the measure depending on the Senate mandate next January.
“It will depend on how disturbing they become,” he said of the Republicans in a call to the New York Times and the Washington Post. “I think you’re going to have to take a look at it.”
Sen. Chris Coons, a Democrat from Delaware, a key ally of Biden, has objected to removing the filibuster for legislation in the past, noting that the threshold prevented Republicans from undoing the Affordable Care Act during the administration. from Obama.
“Working hard across the aisle and trying to find partners willing to move beyond the Trump era is the first thing I’m going to do,” he said. “But, you know, I’m not going to sit for four years and I’m going to let the obstruction stop us from moving forward.”
“The general public thinks we don’t work together and the bills at all. There are dozens of bipartisan bills that are still moving forward, even in this environment,” added Coons. “It just isn’t the bills that address things like gun violence or climate change.”
Democrats may also be able to act on some aspects of their agenda without the dramatic change in rules by relying on the budget reconciliation process, which allows the Senate to adopt tight fiscal measures that affect taxes and spending with a simple majority.
Republicans used the process in 2017 in an effort to repeal Obamacare, but appeared shortly after GOP Sens. John McCain of Arizona and Lisa Murkowski of Alaska voted with Democrats against the GOP proposal.
Democrats could use the process to advance some environmental and health care provisions, as well as undo the 2017 Republican Party tax law, a frequent target of criticism that, if rolled back, could help fund other initiatives.
Hoagland, who has worked in the Senate for 25 years, suggested that Democrats could make other changes unless they remove the legislative filibuster who could help speed up procedures and force more consensus in the chamber, such as a return to the talking filibuster who is He became famous in the movie “Mr Smith Goes to Washington,” which would require a senator to speak on the floor to continue filibustering, something Merkley has advocated for.
“Either we drop it, or we find a compromise, and we stay on a bill until it is settled. Because of the way it has worked today, it just becomes a process to delay and not really consider it,” he said.
.
