Skip to content Skip to footer

Manchin Pens Op-Ed Against Filibuster Reform, Using Section 304 to Pass Bills

Manchin wants a “new era of bipartisanship” — something Republicans have not indicated they’re willing to get behind.

Sen. Joe Manchin is seen during a Senate vote in the Capitol on March 25, 2021.

Senator Joe Manchin, a conservative Democrat from West Virginia and a key vote in the evenly divided “upper chamber” of Congress, penned an op-ed this week that reiterated he would not support changes to the filibuster, while also indicating he may stand opposed to other means Democrats could use to avoid GOP obstruction of legislation.

“There is no circumstance in which I will vote to eliminate or weaken the filibuster,” Manchin wrote in his opinion piece for The Washington Post. “The time has come to end these political games, and to usher a new era of bipartisanship where we find common ground on the major policy debates facing our nation.”

Manchin’s words are, at best, idealistic. Republicans have not given any indication that they want to negotiate on any legislation, and will likely work to obstruct a number of priorities, including election reforms and an infrastructure package that Democrats and President Joe Biden are pushing for. The op-ed also indicates that there is little hope that Manchin will be of aid in fixing the myriad problems that the country is facing.

Manchin also stressed that he was skeptical of utilizing an obscure Senate rule to bypass the filibuster. Section 304 of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974 allows for new legislation to pass without needing 60 votes to break a filibuster so long as proposals are in the form of amendments to existing law that previously passed through reconciliation.

The West Virginia senator expressed dismay at taking that route in the future. “I simply do not believe budget reconciliation should replace regular order in the Senate,” he wrote.

“If the filibuster is eliminated or budget reconciliation becomes the norm, a new and dangerous precedent will be set to pass sweeping, partisan legislation that changes the direction of our nation every time there is a change in political control,” Manchin warned.

Unfortunately for Manchin, the ideals he longs for are not based in reality. Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Kentucky) has, in the past, nicknamed himself the “grim reaper” due to his propensity to obstruct Democratic House-passed legislation in the past.

Despite assurances McConnell has made that his party will cooperate with the Biden administration, he’s shown no indication that he will engage in true bipartisanship, the way Manchin believes things should be. McConnell has only shown that he will continue to use the filibuster to block Democrats’ legislative goals, which is perhaps why he fought so hard for it at the beginning of this Senate — making Section 304 or the elimination of the filibuster one of the only options Democratic lawmakers have at their disposal.

Manchin’s hard line on the filibuster in his op-ed seems to contradict his previous indications that he’d be open to changing the rule on the Senate procedure to disincentivize its over-use.

“Maybe it has to be more painful, maybe you have to stand there,” he said last month on NBC, seemingly supportive of the idea of a talking filibuster. “There’s things we can talk about.”

In his op-ed, Manchin is less adamantly against the use of reconciliation. While expressing dismay for using Section 304 to pass Democrats’ agenda items, Manchin does not suggest he’d never be open to using it, like he did regarding the filibuster, leaving an opening for his colleagues.

That opening may explain why the White House isn’t expressing too much concern over Manchin’s missive published this week. On Thursday morning, White House communications director Kate Bedingfield indicated that Manchin’s points in his op-ed was just “how the process works.”

“Senators will come forward. They’ll raise their concerns, they’ll raise their issues,” Bedingfield said. Biden was not too worried over what Manchin wrote, she added.

“What the President has said is that the only thing he finds unacceptable here is inaction,” Bedingfield explained. “So he knows this is going to be a process where there are going to be compromise[s]. There is going to be negotiation.”

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.