Skip to content Skip to footer

Manchin Derides Harris Over Aim to End Filibuster to Protect Reproductive Rights

Three-quarters of Americans believe ending the filibuster will likely have a positive outcome for the country.

Sen. Joe Manchin speaks during a Senate Appropriations Subcommittee on Financial Services hearing about the fiscal year 2025 budget request for the Treasury Department on Capitol Hill in Washington, D.C., on June 4, 2024.

Sen. Joe Manchin of West Virginia, the right-wing Democrat-turned-independent who is set to retire from the Senate upon the expiration of his term early next year, has announced that he will not endorse Democratic nominee for president Kamala Harris, citing her support for ending the filibuster in order to protect and expand reproductive rights.

The filibuster — a Senate rule that is mentioned exactly zero times within the U.S. Constitution — has been a roadblock for a number of bills over the past decade, including legislation to protect in vitro fertilization, re-establish federal abortion protections, expand voting rights and enact gun reforms, among other items. Even if a proposal is able to receive majority endorsement in the Senate, the filibuster requires a supermajority of 60 votes within the 100-member chamber of Congress for a bill to be passed.

In an interview on Tuesday with Wisconsin Public Radio, Harris said she would support ending the filibuster in order to pass legislation to codify abortion protections that were established in Roe v. Wade, a 1973 Supreme Court decision that the right-wing Court overturned in 2022.

“I think we should eliminate the filibuster for Roe … to actually put back in law the protections for reproductive freedom, and for the ability of every person and every woman to make decisions about their own body and not have their government tell them what to do,” Harris said in the interview.

Harris’s recent comments are consistent with what she’s said in the past. In 2022, for example, she backed ending the filibuster to protect reproductive rights, and in 2019 she said she would support ending the archaic and pointless Senate rule to pass the Green New Deal.

In response to Harris’s latest comments, however, Manchin incredulously attacked Harris for daring to suggest that the rule should be ended.

“Shame on her,” Manchin said, wrongly describing the filibuster as “the Holy Grail of democracy.”

“It’s the only thing that keeps us talking and working together. If she gets rid of that, then this would be the House on steroids,” Manchin added.

In actuality, the filibuster has often been used to block pro-democracy reforms, including the John Lewis Voting Rights Act, which a majority of Americans support. The filibuster was also used multiple times during the Civil Rights Movement as a means to block basic freedoms for nonwhite Americans, and has been used to stifle political rights for women.

Regardless, Manchin said he wouldn’t endorse Harris in her election bid against Trump. “That ain’t going to happen,” he said, adding that, in his opinion, ending the filibuster could “destroy our country” and would be “the most horrible thing.”

When Manchin was reminded that Harris has been against the filibuster for at least the past five years, he shrugged it off, saying he was “hoping she would change this.”

Notably, most democracies around the world do not have a filibuster within the upper chamber of their national legislature, and while supermajorities are generally needed for constitutional changes, no other industrial democracies apply the filibuster to all legislation the way the U.S. Senate does. What’s more, only 13 U.S. states have the filibuster within their legislative rules, further disproving the West Virginia senator’s claims that “democracy” requires the mechanism.

Political observers were quick to criticize Manchin for his comments.

“Defending ‘the filibuster’ over women’s bodily autonomy is one heck of a way for Joe Manchin to leave the scene,” said Democratic political strategist Tom Bonier. “Though I imagine this lack of endorsement helps Harris much more than it hurts her.”

“Joe Manchin thinks the filibuster is the ‘Holy Grail of democracy?’ A rule that was used to thwart democracy by blocking voting rights for Black people is the Holy Grail of democracy? Please tell me that’s a joke,” political commentator Keith Boykin opined.

Charlotte Clymer, an LGBTQ activist and political observer, also weighed in on Manchin’s statements, saying:

My thoughts on the Senate filibuster are simple: it is an historically racist procedural move that was popularized to preserve white supremacy and has long sabotaged the most essential function of our government: serving the people. Kill it, burn it, and flush the ashes.

Polling shows that most Americans agree with Clymer’s views. A Navigator Research poll from March, for example, shows that nearly three-quarters of Americans believe ending the filibuster would help fix America in some way. Only 27 percent of respondents said it wouldn’t help the country.

We’re not backing down in the face of Trump’s threats.

As Donald Trump is inaugurated a second time, independent media organizations are faced with urgent mandates: Tell the truth more loudly than ever before. Do that work even as our standard modes of distribution (such as social media platforms) are being manipulated and curtailed by forces of fascist repression and ruthless capitalism. Do that work even as journalism and journalists face targeted attacks, including from the government itself. And do that work in community, never forgetting that we’re not shouting into a faceless void – we’re reaching out to real people amid a life-threatening political climate.

Our task is formidable, and it requires us to ground ourselves in our principles, remind ourselves of our utility, dig in and commit.

As a dizzying number of corporate news organizations – either through need or greed – rush to implement new ways to further monetize their content, and others acquiesce to Trump’s wishes, now is a time for movement media-makers to double down on community-first models.

At Truthout, we are reaffirming our commitments on this front: We won’t run ads or have a paywall because we believe that everyone should have access to information, and that access should exist without barriers and free of distractions from craven corporate interests. We recognize the implications for democracy when information-seekers click a link only to find the article trapped behind a paywall or buried on a page with dozens of invasive ads. The laws of capitalism dictate an unending increase in monetization, and much of the media simply follows those laws. Truthout and many of our peers are dedicating ourselves to following other paths – a commitment which feels vital in a moment when corporations are evermore overtly embedded in government.

Over 80 percent of Truthout‘s funding comes from small individual donations from our community of readers, and the remaining 20 percent comes from a handful of social justice-oriented foundations. Over a third of our total budget is supported by recurring monthly donors, many of whom give because they want to help us keep Truthout barrier-free for everyone.

You can help by giving today. Whether you can make a small monthly donation or a larger gift, Truthout only works with your support.