Power-sharing agreement. Worried.

[Politicub]

I’m watching coverage of the brief the impeachment managers delivered to the house. It alarmed (and surprised) me that Lindsey Graham is still in charge of the judiciary committee, because a power-sharing agreement has not been reached.

Because of this, Graham is saying he is able to block the confirmation hearings for Merrick Garland, and will probably do so until at least until the impeachment trial ends.

So my worry is, what will stop the GOP from obstructing ratification of a power-sharing agreement? Why is McConnell still in control?

I’m sure there are technical reasons why things are stuck in the mud, but I don’t care about those. What I care about is when the democrats will be able to assume power and lead committees.

I’ve been googling to find the answer, but I’m mainly seeing articles about an agreement “advancing,” but nothing about when this will be resolved.

So sick and angry about the control McConnell is *still* able to assert.

[rampartc]

1. as near as i can tell

this session's organizing resolution was passed when repubs had the majority, and 60 votes are required to pass a new one before 2023. we can still win anything that comes up for a simple majority vote, but i expect nearly everything to be stuck in committee.

[servermsh]

2. Democrats can execute the so-called "nuclear option"

This option (which I don't describe here) would only require 50 votes (plus the VP vote) to remove a filibuster from the vote on organizing resolutions.

[Celerity]

3. Manchin said 100% no way to that a couple weeks ago and has not changed at all. nt

[servermsh]

4. Manchin would be a committee chair.

I can't imagine Manchin refusing to get rid of the filibuster on only organizing resolutions and just sit there for two years not getting his committee. Also, the new Senators can't get any committee seats.

Sooner or later all 50 Dems will do the nuclear option. They should have done it on January 20th.

[Celerity]

5. he ruled out the mini nuke, he's never going to vote to blow out even a millimetre of the filibuster

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2021/01/25/senate-mini-nuclear-option-mcconnell/

snip

“Technically, yes, Democrats could with 50 votes and the vice president detonate a small nuke that only hits organizing resolutions,” Binder told me.

However, Binder added, this would in effect push the Senate further into procedural warfare.

“Each time a majority denotes a nuclear device, it greases the skids for future nukes,” Binder said. For this reason, she noted, Manchin, Sinema and other moderates might be reluctant even to detonate this mini-nuke, meaning Democrats might not have 50 votes for it.

Indeed, Manchin said in an interview that he would not support doing this.

“I will not vote to bust the filibuster under any condition, on anything that you can think of,” Manchin told me. “If you can’t sit down and work with your colleagues on the other side and find a pathway forward, then you shouldn’t be in the Senate.”

“Why would I ... vote on something that would divide us further when Joe Biden is coming in trying to unite the country?” Manchin asked.

When I pointed out that McConnell isn’t letting Democrats take over the Senate, Manchin responded that Schumer and McConnell would have to “sit down and get by this,” adding: “I believe very strongly in bipartisanship.”

[Demsrule86]

7. Manchin is a political creature. He will do what he has to in the end. This is why McConnell

wanted the rules to contain the no filibuster agreement but Schumer said no and McConnell will cave.

[Celerity]

10. He is not going to agree to a mini nuke, and he is going to block a nice chunk of Biden's agenda, as

will, more than likely, Sinema and perhaps others (Feinstein is a sold never on doing away with the filibuster and SCOTUS expansion etc).

The system is broken. We have to rely on the support of people who would be straight up centre right to solid right (in some nations) in most any other advanced western nation, due to the the US being so artificially so skewed to the right and gamed out by the Rethugs and the gaslighting RW media hate machine.

[Politicub]

11. I could see him stonewalling the entire time. He won't need to vote for or against

legislation if it doesn’t come up for a vote in the senate.

He would be able to avoid voting on things like the Equality Act as to not upset his base. It would piss off the LGBT community and allies, but, the thinking goes that we’re accustomed to this form of aggression and discrimination.

[Demsrule86]

6. We can go nuclear if need be.

[FBaggins]

9. No... we can't.

"We" (being those who are willing to "go nuclear&quot don't have the votes.

[Demsrule86]

8. I knew the trial would impede progress on really important stuff...I think it should have been

delayed until the cabinet was in place and the Covid Bill was passed.

[FBaggins]

12. A mindset change that you have to come to accept

There's a large world of difference between "McConnell is still in control" and "we get everything we want". We're going to be somewhere in between for some time to come.

A 50/50 senate means that Schumer will not be as "in control" as McConnell was with a 53/47 majority. Even after the power-sharing agreement enters the picture (assuming that, as reported, it is similar to the last 50/50 senate's), committees will be equally balanced, keeping chairmen from simply dictating hearing dates/lengths/etc.

[Politicub]

13. Oh, I'm ready to accept that things are different with a divided senate.

But I’m still worried about the agreement not being put in place. It would be better than the status quo.