It seems to me that if there were some way to bring Manchin along, he would have been brought along already. Reconciliation is the only way - for now - the Democrats can pass any legislation, and that maneuver can only be used a few times and only for things that can be reasonably construed as "budget" matters (as I understand it), and e…
It seems to me that if there were some way to bring Manchin along, he would have been brought along already. Reconciliation is the only way - for now - the Democrats can pass any legislation, and that maneuver can only be used a few times and only for things that can be reasonably construed as "budget" matters (as I understand it), and even then it requires all 50 DEM Senators' votes plus the VP. or an adequate number of GOP votes to compensate for undisciplined Dems.
Most legislation - including the essential/existential "For the People Act" - can only be passed if 60 Senators (must include at least 10 GOP Senators) vote "yes" (never gonna happen) or if the filibuster is modified, suspended or eliminated (not gonna happen unless Manchin and Sinema make it happen).
The simple vote-counting math is inescapable, and you can be sure Mitch McConnell knows how to count votes.
I am still waiting for some coherent explanation of how the Dems can get past the filibuster barrier with any legislation that is worth the effort. Compromise either involves give and take, or one side gets fleeced.
I think this is precisely correct. Though I applaud Biden and his team for continuing to try, since the Rs only goal (baldly stated by McConnell) is to obstruct Biden until they can get to the 2022 midterms, there is zero chance for meaningful legislation until at least then. Might Manchin and Sinema be brought around in a 12th Hour reveal? You know, "we TRIED to do it the bipartisan way but the other side wouldn't budge" type of thing? If I were writing the movie script, that's what would happen. But I doubt it will happen in real life.
What if two or more republican senators (Hawley and Johnson come to mind) are arrested for insurrection? Are they removed from Congress while pending trial? Does Congress continue on given the vacancies? Would this create an opening for majority vote? Just thinking outside the box.
Indictments and arrests are separate from decisions about the status of individual Congresspeople. They must be made by the House or Senate.
The classic case is the House expelling Preston Brooks in 1856 for beating Charles Sumner half to death. Brooks was promptly reelected by his constituents. (He died within a year, ensuring his status as a nasty footnote in American history.) NB, his home district of Edgefield SC was the most violent county in the entire country.
D Donald, Charles Sumner & the Coming of the Civil War
J Freeman, The Field of Blood
S Puleo, The Caning
PS, I often leave a modest offering at the Sumner statue in Harvard Square when passing by. It's literally putting in my two cents worth.
Thank you too, Eileen. The ST is actually named after someone else who's less important, a MA governor's son. But I revere Sen Sumner, and thus also associate the tunnel with him.
Great questions! I'm sure there are a few poli-sci and history profs reading these comments who are able to give better answers than I can. Google is often useful for the quick and general....
I did a little google search to find out that the state governor replaces a senator until a special election is called. Although there may be differences in each state. The governor of Missouri is a republican. The governor of Wisconsin is a democrat. Wonder if a governor is required to replace with like party?
It seems to me that on this point you really either don't understand how things work, or haven't been keeping up with current affairs. You *cannot* ignore either Manchin or Sinema, unless you want to live with a 48-member minority in the Senate. Please, I hate having to educate people I consider otherwise intelligent.
TC, I always find your comments interesting and I often agree with your take on things (as I understand it). Unfortunately, when the late evening rolls around here in Italy, I begin to lose the thread and am not sure who is responding to whose comments. Jeanne Doyle says she's sorry if that was her you're educating and admits to asking a stupid question, but it occurred to me that I'm the one you think needs educating, given that your 2-hr. old comment is directly under my 7-hr. old comment. In any case, it's no big deal as I'm sure I still need lots of educating if anyone wants to give it a try.
Sorry if that was me you’re educating. I don’t ignore those two but I think I did ask a stupid question. Sometimes I ask questions here instead of looking them up because if I look them up online and try to come back to the same spot on substack, I’m completely lost. Then I give up because I need to sleep.
Maybe you should be using a laptop - with Chrome (on my MacBook Pro) I can open a web page - and it sits there, while I open another - so it's easy to flip between items without losing your place. I don't know how many pages I can have "on standby" - seems a lot. Some pages refresh (if you have to) and take you to the part you left, some just start at the top again..
I don't believe that the president has the power to change Congressional rules through direct action. Presidents must work through and persuade members of each chamber.
It seems to me that if there were some way to bring Manchin along, he would have been brought along already. Reconciliation is the only way - for now - the Democrats can pass any legislation, and that maneuver can only be used a few times and only for things that can be reasonably construed as "budget" matters (as I understand it), and even then it requires all 50 DEM Senators' votes plus the VP. or an adequate number of GOP votes to compensate for undisciplined Dems.
Most legislation - including the essential/existential "For the People Act" - can only be passed if 60 Senators (must include at least 10 GOP Senators) vote "yes" (never gonna happen) or if the filibuster is modified, suspended or eliminated (not gonna happen unless Manchin and Sinema make it happen).
The simple vote-counting math is inescapable, and you can be sure Mitch McConnell knows how to count votes.
I am still waiting for some coherent explanation of how the Dems can get past the filibuster barrier with any legislation that is worth the effort. Compromise either involves give and take, or one side gets fleeced.
I think this is precisely correct. Though I applaud Biden and his team for continuing to try, since the Rs only goal (baldly stated by McConnell) is to obstruct Biden until they can get to the 2022 midterms, there is zero chance for meaningful legislation until at least then. Might Manchin and Sinema be brought around in a 12th Hour reveal? You know, "we TRIED to do it the bipartisan way but the other side wouldn't budge" type of thing? If I were writing the movie script, that's what would happen. But I doubt it will happen in real life.
What if two or more republican senators (Hawley and Johnson come to mind) are arrested for insurrection? Are they removed from Congress while pending trial? Does Congress continue on given the vacancies? Would this create an opening for majority vote? Just thinking outside the box.
Indictments and arrests are separate from decisions about the status of individual Congresspeople. They must be made by the House or Senate.
The classic case is the House expelling Preston Brooks in 1856 for beating Charles Sumner half to death. Brooks was promptly reelected by his constituents. (He died within a year, ensuring his status as a nasty footnote in American history.) NB, his home district of Edgefield SC was the most violent county in the entire country.
D Donald, Charles Sumner & the Coming of the Civil War
J Freeman, The Field of Blood
S Puleo, The Caning
PS, I often leave a modest offering at the Sumner statue in Harvard Square when passing by. It's literally putting in my two cents worth.
Thank you for the history and book titles! I used to go through the Charles Sumner tunnel as a young girl. Never appreciated the history.
Thank you too, Eileen. The ST is actually named after someone else who's less important, a MA governor's son. But I revere Sen Sumner, and thus also associate the tunnel with him.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sumner_Tunnel.
Yes, please, Dear God in Heaven, Mother Nature and Buddha hear us!
Great questions! I'm sure there are a few poli-sci and history profs reading these comments who are able to give better answers than I can. Google is often useful for the quick and general....
I did a little google search to find out that the state governor replaces a senator until a special election is called. Although there may be differences in each state. The governor of Missouri is a republican. The governor of Wisconsin is a democrat. Wonder if a governor is required to replace with like party?
Well, I hope all these insurrectionist politicians are arrested and run through the wringer. This will not be pretty.
This website lists this how each state handles a senate vacancy.
https://www.ncsl.org/research/elections-and-campaigns/vacancies-in-the-united-states-senate637302453.aspx#Foot1
Of special note: McConnell just helped Kentucky change the way a senate vacancy is handled: Kentucky’s SB 228 requires the governor to appoint someone who shares the same political party as the departing senator and makes them select that person from a list of three names provided by the executive committee of that senator's state party. https://www.courier-journal.com/story/news/politics/ky-general-assembly/2021/03/30/mitch-mcconnell-recommended-changes-kentuckys-senate-vacancy-rules/7056325002/
.
It seems to me that on this point you really either don't understand how things work, or haven't been keeping up with current affairs. You *cannot* ignore either Manchin or Sinema, unless you want to live with a 48-member minority in the Senate. Please, I hate having to educate people I consider otherwise intelligent.
TC, I always find your comments interesting and I often agree with your take on things (as I understand it). Unfortunately, when the late evening rolls around here in Italy, I begin to lose the thread and am not sure who is responding to whose comments. Jeanne Doyle says she's sorry if that was her you're educating and admits to asking a stupid question, but it occurred to me that I'm the one you think needs educating, given that your 2-hr. old comment is directly under my 7-hr. old comment. In any case, it's no big deal as I'm sure I still need lots of educating if anyone wants to give it a try.
Sorry if that was me you’re educating. I don’t ignore those two but I think I did ask a stupid question. Sometimes I ask questions here instead of looking them up because if I look them up online and try to come back to the same spot on substack, I’m completely lost. Then I give up because I need to sleep.
Maybe you should be using a laptop - with Chrome (on my MacBook Pro) I can open a web page - and it sits there, while I open another - so it's easy to flip between items without losing your place. I don't know how many pages I can have "on standby" - seems a lot. Some pages refresh (if you have to) and take you to the part you left, some just start at the top again..
Thanks, Hugh!
I think Joe can change the filibuster back to being a marathon monologue with just an executive order. Am I wrong about that?
I don't believe that the president has the power to change Congressional rules through direct action. Presidents must work through and persuade members of each chamber.
The Senate makes, changes or eliminates its own rules. Joe Biden can express an opinion. That's it as far as I know.