McConnell and Schumer Agreement on Committees/Rules

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

There's always an alternative to this power-sharing deal. Nuke the filibuster and ram through DC statehood. Problem solved.

Schumer's too much of a coward to do that.

Imagine actually believing this  

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

This is going to end with Schumer using the nuclear option; Schumer couldn’t fold on this even if he wanted to (and he clearly doesn’t).  The delay is probably just theater so Manchin & co can say they had no choice b/c things were being ground to a halt by abuse of the filibuster.  Even Angus King just said he’s fine with abolishing the filibuster completely if McConnell tries to abuse it (as he already is) and he was one of the hardest “no” votes on abolishing the filibuster.  

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

I'm starting to get concerned that Schumer hasn't blown past this yet with a majority vote. He may not have the votes yet for it.

I'll be concerned if he hasn't done so by the middle of the first week of February.  That said, I'd predict the nuclear option will be used to settle this sometime next week, but the votes will be there when push comes to shove.  The current situation is untenable and will be addressed sooner rather than later.  Moreover, it's something where Schumer can't fold even if he wanted to (and I've seen no evidence that he does).

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

I'm starting to get concerned that Schumer hasn't blown past this yet with a majority vote. He may not have the votes yet for it.

Answer is very simple: Manchin will not go Nuclear on principle (even if Schumer were to do a very narrow precedent applying only to organizing resolutions)

If thats the case, this entire administration is Inksed from the beginning. I hope that is not the case.

Don’t worry, it isn’t

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

Okay this is a negative development if it holds.

https://twitter.com/seungminkim/status/1353734942400897025?s=21

"For now" - Chuck.

Do you really think that there is any chance the filibuster is changed is any way at all in the next 2 years?

I don't think it, I know it. Every Senator who claims to be an "institutionalist" has their breaking point. Coons did. King did. Feinstein did. McCain did. Sinema will too (& that's assuming that this statement isn't just Manchin-like huffing & puffing).

Sinema isn't an institutionalist though.  She's just a megalomaniac devoid of any genuine ideological beliefs whose current schtick is branding herself as a ConservaDem at times bordering on the edges of DINO territory.  I honestly wouldn't be surprised if she switches parties if the Senate flips in 2022.  I'm not saying she will, only that no one should be surprised if she does.  I worry far more about her deliberately tanking the Democratic policy agenda then I do about Manchin's fake #ModerateHero song and dance routine.  

On the bright side, the fact that she is devoid of any real beliefs beyond "whatever advances Krysten Sinema's political fortunes at the moment is good, everything else be d***ed" means that it means less when she says she's not open to changing her mind than it would with someone like Coons or Angus King.

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

Okay this is a negative development if it holds.

https://twitter.com/seungminkim/status/1353734942400897025?s=21

"For now" - Chuck.

Do you really think that there is any chance the filibuster is changed is any way at all in the next 2 years?

I don't think it, I know it. Every Senator who claims to be an "institutionalist" has their breaking point. Coons did. King did. Feinstein did. McCain did. Sinema will too (& that's assuming that this statement isn't just Manchin-like huffing & puffing).

Sinema isn't an institutionalist though.  She's just a megalomaniac devoid of any genuine ideological beliefs whose current schtick is branding herself as a ConservaDem at times bordering on the edges of DINO territory.  I honestly wouldn't be surprised if she switches parties if the Senate flips in 2022.  I'm not saying she will, only that no one should be surprised if she does.  I worry far more about her deliberately tanking the Democratic policy agenda then I do about Manchin's fake #ModerateHero song and dance routine.  

On the bright side, the fact that she is devoid of any real beliefs beyond "whatever advances Krysten Sinema's political fortunes at the moment is good, everything else be d***ed" means that it means less when she says she's not open to changing her mind than it would with someone like Coons or Angus King.

Hm...maybe it is time to threaten a primary challenge.

I think she should be primaried regardless of what she does with the filibuster tbh. At best, she's another Joe Lieberman waiting to happen.

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

Kyrsten Sinema would never change parties ahahahhahahaa. Have you seen the AZGOP? ahahahhahahaa. ahahahaha.



ahahhahahah

I know she's a slippery eel, but saying she'd become a Republican is just not true.

Sure, but she could become a de facto Republican by becoming an independent who caucuses with them.

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

Well that was anti climatic. I was hoping for a more interesting plot line than this. That is what happens when you have had so many fascinating plot lines to savor over a period of time. You get jaded. Sad.

The climax comes when Manchin or Sinema either lets the new Voting Rights Act (whatever they're calling it) or DC Statehood die at McConnell's hands or breaks the filibuster.

The climax comes in 4-6 months after Biden's non-reconciliation priorities keep getting filibustered and Biden finally decides he's is ready to really make an all out push for nuking the filibuster.  Biden sat out this round and I do think Biden has unique credibility on this issue with the institutionalist Senators.  

As for McConnell's little stunt, not only did he clearly lose*, but I think it backfired pretty badly.  I mean, for all the focus on Sinema and Manchin, the Senate Democratic Caucus clearly shifted toward nuking the filibuster due to McConnell's antics.  Just look at all the folks who were realistically potential no votes:  

Durbin: Soft No -> Hard Yes

Feinstein: Public hard no -> No comment either way (but she's voted to go nuclear before which means we probably have her vote if we need it)

Bennet: No -> Everything is on the table, including abolishing the filibuster (de facto soft yes)

Tester: Hard no -> a version of "I really don't wanna, but if the GOP tries to block all Biden's major priorities, then my vote will be there if/when you need it" (de facto soft yes)

King: Sinema-level Hard No (I.e. not open to changing his mind) -> a version of "I really don't wanna, but if the GOP tries to block all Biden's major priorities, then my vote will be there if/when you need it" (de facto soft yes)

Coons: Hard no -> Everything is on the table, including nuking the filibuster; Coons probably won't formally switch to yes unless/until Biden asks him to do so (de facto soft yes)

Hickenlooper: Soft yes -> Soft yes

Alex Padilla: Position unknown -> Hard yes

Mark Kelly: Position unknown -> Position unknown

Jon Osoff: "Maybe" -> Position unknown

Raphael Warnock: Position unknown -> Position unknown

TL;DR: McConnell's stunt seems to have effectively flipped five Dems from "no" to some version of "yes"/"you'll have my vote if you need it" on abolishing the filibuster this session.  Manchin and Sinema didn't change their positions, so McConnell didn't really gain anything.  He didn't get the codified filibuster protection he wanted and the number of Senators opposed to the nuclear option shrunk by five...and that's without Biden getting involved after months of popular Democratic policies being obstructed by filibuster abuse.  I dunno, that sure sounds like a McConnell loss to me

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

McConnell must be nauseous after all that spinning.

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

Manchin and Sinema support DC statehood, so just make DC a state to minimize their votes.

Why?  You can easily do DC statehood through reconciliation* and it’d be better to have the fight over broadly popular policies like raising the minimum wage to $15, $2000 COVID relief checks, that voting rights/election reform bill named after John Lewis, expanding/fixing Obamacare.  You know, things that could give ammunition to someone like Ruben Gallego in a 2024 primary challenge against Sinema if she screws us over.  

You wanna make it clear that if the legislation doesn’t pass b/c Sinema won’t nuke the filibuster, then her political career will be over, but without someone like Schumer having to actually say the quiet part out loud.

*As Steve Dennis has noted, Congress controls DC’s budget and as such, giving DC statehood would certainly effect the federal budget.

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

Manchin and Sinema support DC statehood, so just make DC a state to minimize their votes.

The problem is that even if Manchin and Sinema support it, DC statehood can't happen while there's still a filibuster.

It can be done through reconciliation

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

Manchin and Sinema support DC statehood, so just make DC a state to minimize their votes.

The problem is that even if Manchin and Sinema support it, DC statehood can't happen while there's still a filibuster.

It can be done through reconciliation

It can be done by lowering the filibuster threshold too. I mean, it's a de facto nuclear option. DC statehood is obviously not a budget bill.

Yeah, anything can be done through reconciliation, but that's just tantamount to nuking the filibuster at that point.

Not so!  Congress controls DC's budget and as such, admitting it as a state would very clearly effect the federal budget and government spending.

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

Manchin and Sinema support DC statehood, so just make DC a state to minimize their votes.

The problem is that even if Manchin and Sinema support it, DC statehood can't happen while there's still a filibuster.

It can be done through reconciliation

It can be done by lowering the filibuster threshold too. I mean, it's a de facto nuclear option. DC statehood is obviously not a budget bill.

Yeah, anything can be done through reconciliation, but that's just tantamount to nuking the filibuster at that point.

Not so!  Congress controls DC's budget and as such, admitting it as a state would very clearly effect the federal budget and government spending.

Yeah, but trying to get it to comply with the strict technical details of the reconciliation process (e.g., the Byrd Rule, required sunset provisions that really couldn't logically apply to statehood, etc.) would get Congress stuck in so many headache (if not migraine)-inducing weeds that it'd just be stupidly inefficient to do that instead of outright nuking the filibuster.

Of course, they could just nuke what the reconciliation process itself is, but again, that's just tantamount to nuking the filibuster. If we've reached the point where nuking reconciliation would be needed to do something, then that's just all-but-nuking the filibuster anyway.

Nuking the Byrd rule/reconciliation process gives an out to folks like Manchin.  It’d be for something clearly tied to the federal budget and technically wouldn’t eliminate the legislative filibuster, it’d just be narrowing the scope in the specific context of reconciliation.  I actually think there’s a pretty strong case for this one.

Side note: If Dems do this, they should refer to it as “invoking the McConnell rule” (from Gorsuch’s confirmation in 2017) instead of calling it the nuclear option, if only because it’ll annoy McConnell

Edit: Also, there’s gonna be a Byrd rule fight either way about raising the minimum wage, so...

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

Anyone know when the power-sharing agreement actually takes effect?

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

Any news about this?

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

McConnell is just trying to burn through as many legislation days as he can, that’s all this is about

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

Am I wrong to assume the longer McConell drags his feet on this ... the better chance Manchin says F*it on the fillibuster?

No, McConnell's obstruction will be the biggest factor in Manchin/Sinema going nuclear.

Biden going to the mat to lobby the Senate Democratic caucus to go nuclear is more important imo.  So far, Biden hasn’t done anything like that.  It’ll also be interesting to see how many Dems come around to the nuclear option once things like the John Lewis Voting Rights Act, DC statehood (if not done through reconciliation), etc are actually put on the schedule and then filibustered.  The pressure from Democratic voters will be much greater then.