With the first reported cases of the South African strain of COVID-19 being documented in South Carolina, it is clear that a comprehensive vaccine rollout plan, funding for state and local governments and further economic stimulus are urgently needed.
But partisan tensions continue to boil on Capitol Hill, threatening Republican obstruction of President Biden’s American Rescue Plan. Debate rages over whether to break up the proposed aide in order to pass selections through the budget reconciliation process or whether to abolish the filibuster altogether.
At its core, the filibuster is a procedural measure that requires most legislation to be passed with a 60-vote majority in the Senate, rather than the 51-vote simple majority—with the tie-breaking vote of Vice President Kamala Harris—that Democrats hold in the Senate.
In modern popular culture, the filibuster is often depicted as a single senator extending debate by ranting and rambling on the floor until the bill or resolution at hand is rescinded or the amendments the senator proposed adopted. This theatrical occasion is actually quite rare, and the filibuster is often employed without such fanfare.
In practice, Senate debate does not require all sitting members to be in attendance, time restraints on debate are limited and debate can be extended with just a few senators on the floor at any given time. The filibuster in these cases is merely used to prevent a motion of cloture, or a vote to end debate, which requires a 60–vote majority.
In effect, the vote on the final passing of most bills only requires a simple majority of 51 votes, but the 60-vote majority required to end debate on a motion of cloture and take that final vote often kills the prospect of success, especially in such a closely divided Congress.
In the handoff of control over the Senate and its committees, Minority Leader Mitch McConnell refused to agree to a power-sharing arrangement unless incoming Majority Leader Chuck Schumer pledged not to abolish the filibuster, betraying his intentions to maintain GOP leverage in the Senate.
“I believe the unique rules of the Senate which forces compromise between the parties is needed now more than ever,” McConnell wrote in a memo, according to The Hill. “Having an equally divided Senate means that we have to work together to get anything done and the spirit of true bipartisan compromise is possible only when each side realizes they must come to the table together.”
Should Senate Democrats choose to “detonate the nuclear option,” or reduce the scope of the filibuster rule with a simple majority vote, Biden would be free to pass some of his more controversial policy ideas. These include, but are not limited to, comprehensive immigration and healthcare reform, climate-focused infrastructure bills, a $15 federal minimum wage and most, if not all, of the COVID relief proposed in the American Rescue Plan, with just 51 votes.
But many believe, conservatives in particular, that the abolishing of the filibuster would be an abdication of minority rights in Congress. It is their view that the filibuster incentivizes bipartisanship, deal-making and compromise
In the face of unified Democratic control, many Republicans are voicing pleas for “unity,” calling for the respect of norms and institutional procedure, and declaring that the end of the filibuster would also mark the end of the Senate’s prominence as “the world’s greatest deliberative body.”
On the Democratic side, their cause does not exactly fall on deaf ears. McConnell eventually dropped his demand of Schumer, pointing to centrist Democratic Senators Joe Manchin III of West Virginia and Kyrsten Sinema of Arizona, both of whom had voiced opposition to ending the filibuster.
“With these assurances, I look forward to moving ahead with a power-sharing agreement modeled on that precedent,” McConnell wrote in a statement.
In the meantime, some have suggested employing the budget reconciliation process, which would require just a simple majority to quickly pass through sections of Biden’s plan. The process is quite limited, however, based mainly on changes to the tax code and the dispersion of government spending, with various additional restraints.
One such effort, referred to as “shots and checks,” would prioritize vaccine rollout and stimulus checks to Americans, setting aside some of the more controversial aspects of the Biden plan.
Still, this piecemeal approach would likely dissatisfy many Democrats, deny Americans many of the relief measures they need and prevent Biden from delivering on many of his campaign promises, as several elements of his proposed plan and further policy goals would undoubtedly fail to meet the criteria of “budget reconciliation.”
While Manchin and Sinema have yet to show signs of budging, the obstructionist record of Senate Republicans has caused at least one senator to question his stance on the filibuster.
“I feel pretty damn strongly, but I will also tell you this: I am here to get things done,” said Jon Tester, Democrat of Montana, in a statement to The New York Times. “If all that happens is filibuster after filibuster, roadblock after roadblock, then my opinion may change.”
It is unclear whether or not Schumer plans to bring a vote on the filibuster to the Senate floor in the near future, but it is obvious that comprehensive relief for Americans, as well as the success of the Biden administration, hinges upon this contentious ongoing debate.
