Or at least guys of Senator Manchin’s (R-WV) age would affirm. Consider his defense of the Senate filibuster:
The right to vote is fundamental to our American democracy and protecting that right should not be about party or politics. Least of all, protecting this right, which is a value I share, should never be done in a partisan manner. [Charleston Gazette-Mail]
That’s a nice start.
During my time as West Virginia’s secretary of state, I was determined to protect this right and ensure our elections are fair, accessible and secure. Not to benefit my party but all the people of West Virginia. For example, as secretary of state I took specific actions to establish early voting for the first time in West Virginia in order to provide expanded options for those whose work or family schedule made it difficult for them to vote on Election Day. Throughout my tenure in politics, I have been guided by this simple philosophy — our party labels can’t prevent us from doing what is right.
Ah, credentials! But, in this case, the credential card is designed to distract from the realities of the situation.
Democrats in Congress have proposed a sweeping election reform bill called the For the People Act. This more than 800-page bill has garnered zero Republican support. Why? Are the very Republican senators who voted to impeach Trump because of actions that led to an attack on our democracy unwilling to support actions to strengthen our democracy? Are these same senators, whom many in my party applauded for their courage, now threats to the very democracy we seek to protect?
Uh oh. Are there specific objections to the bill? How does it favor any group over another? Or does it simply make it easier for qualified voters to exercise the franchise?
Unfortunately – for Manchin – he wants to rely on a proxy, always a tricky business, for measuring the worthiness of the bill: How much Republican opposition is there to the bill. This, in turn, exposes some questionable assumptions:
- That Republicans will put Country over Party;
- That Republicans believe all citizens should get the chance to vote;
- That Republicans are free of dangerous delusions concerning the Democrats;
- That Republicans are not under mortal threat to vote in certain ways;
- That any given Republican, knowing the filibuster will be upheld, will still vote against the filibuster;
And there’s more, but I’m bored with picking nits. All of the above may be verified through consultations concerning recent history.
But we’re not finished here, because Manchin really exposes himself:
With that in mind, some Democrats have again proposed eliminating the Senate filibuster rule in order to pass the For the People Act with only Democratic support. They’ve attempted to demonize the filibuster and conveniently ignore how it has been critical to protecting the rights of Democrats in the past.
Manchin distracts from the real point with that second sentence; indeed, he conveniently ignores the fact that many of those Democrats have formally retracted their support for the filibuster.
And the real point?
As everyone knows, it takes 60 votes under current Senate rules on the filibuster to invoke cloture.
This means that 41 members of the Senate control the business of the Senate that doesn’t fall into the categories of financial or confirmation of judicial or Cabinet nominees. As there are 50 Republican members, this means that 41 Republicans outvote the 51 Democratic members of the Senate (Vice President Harris is considered a member of the Senate for voting purposes on tie votes), which is in direct contradiction of Manchin’s first paragraph, above.
And renders his position arrant nonsense.
From a historical point of view, the filibuster isn’t a hallowed part of the Constitution; it’s an experiment. An experiment which is proving to be less and less effective as the composition and temperament of the Senate changes over time.
If Manchin cannot clarify what he finds objectionable about the For The People Act – beyond the title, of course, but legislative titling is just a peeve of mine – then he should vote for it. If Republicans will not vote for it, and he thinks that matters, then he’s not fulfilling his responsibilities as a United States Senator, and should consider resigning in shame.
And it’s really too bad. Long time readers will understand why I like this point:
As such, congressional action on federal voting rights legislation must be the result of both Democrats and Republicans coming together to find a pathway forward or we risk further dividing and destroying the republic we swore to protect and defend as elected officials.
Because I believe governance is difficult and needs contributions from many, I like the sentiment. But I recognize that contributions must be honest, and I am no longer convinced that Republicans are honest. There have been multiple admissions of guilt on that front, from Gingrich to Lee to McConnell; why should I believe such dubious characters as these have changed?
No. In better voting procedures, they see their policies and politico-religious tenets, which are diminishing in plausibility and popularity, dragging them to defeat. Better to constrict voting possibilities and scream lies about fraud than risk defeat.
Manchin speaks in fine words, but they clothe intellectual chaos. Enough, Manchin. Either admit you do not believe in the sanctity of the vote, or change your mind.
