In an op-ed published in The Washington Post just before Republicans were set to block the Democrats’ voting rights bill using the Senate filibuster, Sen. Kyrsten Sinema (D-Arizona) made a number of arguments in favor of keeping the Senate filibuster that critics pointed out were flawed at best and completely false at worst.
In the article, Sinema laid out her reasons for being one of the Senate’s staunchest supporters of the filibuster by mostly resting on the flawed argument that if Democrats get rid of the filibuster to pass bills, then Republicans will undo those bills if they regain the majority.
Predictably, much as her fellow filibuster defender Sen. Joe Manchin (D-West Virginia) contends, Sinema concludes that members of Congress should focus on bipartisanship instead. “The best way to achieve durable, lasting results? Bipartisan cooperation,” she writes, seemingly ignoring the fact that Republicans have stated that their only goal is obstruction.
Political analysts and journalists expressed frustration with Sinema’s op-ed, saying that her arguments — “We have more to lose than gain by ending the filibuster” — were weak and easily disproved.
Sinema writes that if Democrats were to pass healthcare reform after eliminating the filibuster, Republicans could slash Medicare, social security or women’s reproductive health funding when they are in the majority. Or, if Democrats passed legislation on climate or education, Republicans would retaliate by shrinking budgets and federal agencies — something Republicans did anyway under Trump.
As critics of the op-ed pointed out, Republicans could make changes right now to nearly all of the things she mentions using reconciliation, which only requires a simple majority vote. Indeed, Democrats are currently working on a plan that uses budget reconciliation to expand Medicare coverage, among other proposals like infrastructure funding.
Meanwhile, if Republicans gain control of the Senate and Democrats attempt to block their goals, political writers have predicted, they are very likely to get rid of the filibuster. After all, toward the beginning of his presidency, former President Donald Trump had urged the GOP to get rid of the filibuster. The party has only grown more extreme since then.
“The doomsday scenarios Sinema lays out are either already possible via reconciliation, or will happen anyway if Republicans decide they really want them to pass,” wrote Adam Jentleson, who was senior aide to former Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, on Twitter. “Republicans will eliminate the filibuster themselves as soon as it stands in the way of something they really want.”
Sinema’s op-ed so confounded liberals and progressives alike that even moderate pundits like New York’s Jonathan Chait and Vox co-founder Ezra Klein shared their frustration with her arguments. Sinema’s argument is “built on a mistrust of voters’ intelligence and a rejection of elections as a method of holding politicians accountable,” wrote Klein. “That Sinema is using it to help the GOP block bills to strengthen elections is, thus fitting.”
Indeed, the fact that the GOP hasn’t yet used reconciliation to severely weaken many popular democratic programs like Medicare is proof positive to some pundits that the program’s popularity speaks for itself when Republicans run for re-election. In other words, if Democrats passed popular proposals like Joe Biden’s infrastructure bill, a $15 federal minimum wage or Medicare for All, for instance, the GOP may not want to repeal the bills for fear of facing voters’ wrath.
But by blocking Democratic proposals while Democrats have power of the Senate, the House and the White House, Republicans are able to paint the Democrats as incompetent. People like Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vermont) have pointed out that keeping the filibuster could end up working against Democrats because “the bottom line is the American people want results.”
Meanwhile, as some political writers have pointed out, the filibuster currently stands in the way of an immediate issue: Democrats protecting voting rights. At the state level, Republicans are already passing legislation with the goal of suppressing voters — legislation that Sinema is helping to uphold with her support of the filibuster.
Truthout Is Preparing to Meet Trump’s Agenda With Resistance at Every Turn
Dear Truthout Community,
If you feel rage, despondency, confusion and deep fear today, you are not alone. We’re feeling it too. We are heartsick. Facing down Trump’s fascist agenda, we are desperately worried about the most vulnerable people among us, including our loved ones and everyone in the Truthout community, and our minds are racing a million miles a minute to try to map out all that needs to be done.
We must give ourselves space to grieve and feel our fear, feel our rage, and keep in the forefront of our mind the stark truth that millions of real human lives are on the line. And simultaneously, we’ve got to get to work, take stock of our resources, and prepare to throw ourselves full force into the movement.
Journalism is a linchpin of that movement. Even as we are reeling, we’re summoning up all the energy we can to face down what’s coming, because we know that one of the sharpest weapons against fascism is publishing the truth.
There are many terrifying planks to the Trump agenda, and we plan to devote ourselves to reporting thoroughly on each one and, crucially, covering the movements resisting them. We also recognize that Trump is a dire threat to journalism itself, and that we must take this seriously from the outset.
Last week, the four of us sat down to have some hard but necessary conversations about Truthout under a Trump presidency. How would we defend our publication from an avalanche of far right lawsuits that seek to bankrupt us? How would we keep our reporters safe if they need to cover outbreaks of political violence, or if they are targeted by authorities? How will we urgently produce the practical analysis, tools and movement coverage that you need right now — breaking through our normal routines to meet a terrifying moment in ways that best serve you?
It will be a tough, scary four years to produce social justice-driven journalism. We need to deliver news, strategy, liberatory ideas, tools and movement-sparking solutions with a force that we never have had to before. And at the same time, we desperately need to protect our ability to do so.
We know this is such a painful moment and donations may understandably be the last thing on your mind. But we must ask for your support, which is needed in a new and urgent way.
We promise we will kick into an even higher gear to give you truthful news that cuts against the disinformation and vitriol and hate and violence. We promise to publish analyses that will serve the needs of the movements we all rely on to survive the next four years, and even build for the future. We promise to be responsive, to recognize you as members of our community with a vital stake and voice in this work.
Please dig deep if you can, but a donation of any amount will be a truly meaningful and tangible action in this cataclysmic historical moment. We are presently looking for 143 new monthly donors before midnight tonight.
We’re with you. Let’s do all we can to move forward together.
With love, rage, and solidarity,
Maya, Negin, Saima, and Ziggy