Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

ColinC

(8,227 posts)
Tue Jan 18, 2022, 11:12 PM Jan 2022

Joe Manchin said there is no precedent to end a fillibuster with 51 votes.

He also said that you cannot break a rule to make a rule -also suggesting there is no precedent in the Senate to change rules with only 51 votes. However, every rule change in recent history was done with 51 votes. Right?

48 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Joe Manchin said there is no precedent to end a fillibuster with 51 votes. (Original Post) ColinC Jan 2022 OP
Filibuster carve outs qazplm135 Jan 2022 #1
It sure sounds like Manchin is floundering. TheBlackAdder Jan 2022 #30
Why does he keep arguing and fighting every point of content and procedure? Irish_Dem Jan 2022 #2
To delay. He's been stringing us along the whole time bringing us Earth-shine Jan 2022 #16
It is also very damaging to Biden and our party. Irish_Dem Jan 2022 #17
I believe he and Sinema want to damage Biden and the party. Earth-shine Jan 2022 #20
Yes that seems the major point of their behavior. Irish_Dem Jan 2022 #21
Exactly Owl Jan 2022 #25
So glad Manchin is not a flip-flopper when it comes to the filibuster wellst0nev0ter Jan 2022 #3
He isn't FBaggins Jan 2022 #5
So he doesn't support ending the filibuster to reform the filibuster wellst0nev0ter Jan 2022 #8
It does make sense FBaggins Jan 2022 #10
Yeah, only people who don't really want change wellst0nev0ter Jan 2022 #22
Except he never said that FBaggins Jan 2022 #23
Once again, from his campaign website wellst0nev0ter Jan 2022 #26
Entirely missing from your link... FBaggins Jan 2022 #27
Except for the debt ceiling? Yeah, he's 100% full of shit and please with the 60 vote crap ... uponit7771 Jan 2022 #29
Were you really not paying attention at the time? FBaggins Jan 2022 #43
Soooooo, Manchin changed filibuster rules for debt ceiling? Yes ... with "bypass" that he's uponit7771 Jan 2022 #44
Nope FBaggins Jan 2022 #45
Link and quote from Manchin stating such? thx in advance uponit7771 Jan 2022 #46
Why would Manchin need to say anything? FBaggins Jan 2022 #47
Cause he has never declared he'd apply the same "bypass" to voting rights. He need to be explicit uponit7771 Jan 2022 #48
Yeah, yeah ... he is. He was OK with changing filibuster rules for debt ceiling uponit7771 Jan 2022 #28
So why didn't his vote qazplm135 Jan 2022 #31
Because it got 60 votes FBaggins Jan 2022 #32
Baloney qazplm135 Jan 2022 #35
Substituting a cloture vote that requires 60 votes with a different process vote... FBaggins Jan 2022 #36
Lol qazplm135 Jan 2022 #37
You appear to "know" so many things that lack any rational support/basis FBaggins Jan 2022 #38
Yawn qazplm135 Jan 2022 #39
There's that imagination again FBaggins Jan 2022 #41
Lol qazplm135 Jan 2022 #42
No. Most rule changes are by much larger majorities FBaggins Jan 2022 #4
Which is precedent for doing the thing he said there is no precedent for, no? ColinC Jan 2022 #11
The thin line everyone recognizes is that those modifications were for executive and judicial Calista241 Jan 2022 #12
Ah! So it has been for a different "thing" ColinC Jan 2022 #14
The debt ceiling provision still had to pass a cloture vote. Calista241 Jan 2022 #18
And if they hadn't? qazplm135 Jan 2022 #33
Look what he just said Polybius Jan 2022 #6
They vote on rules at the beginning of every session. Majority vote is all that is required...nt Wounded Bear Jan 2022 #7
Rules passage at the beginning of the term requires 67 votes, a 2/3 supermajority. Calista241 Jan 2022 #19
So what exactly is trying to do the same thing over and over and expect any change, defined as? tirebiter Jan 2022 #9
That disingenuous SOB BlueIdaho Jan 2022 #13
Hes a whining sniveling sort. nt BootinUp Jan 2022 #15
He has been blowing smoke out his ass for way too long! It has Emile Jan 2022 #24
Someone needs to tell that fucking fuck he is not in charge here. gldstwmn Jan 2022 #34
This, from his predecessor..... The Grand Illuminist Jan 2022 #40

qazplm135

(7,447 posts)
1. Filibuster carve outs
Tue Jan 18, 2022, 11:18 PM
Jan 2022

Have obviously been done before. He just doesn't want to do it so he's spinning justifications.

I can understand that there are risks to carve outs but they just did one a month ago so that tells me those two just don't think voting rights are worthy.

Irish_Dem

(45,616 posts)
2. Why does he keep arguing and fighting every point of content and procedure?
Tue Jan 18, 2022, 11:18 PM
Jan 2022

Why not just say how he will vote on a bill and leave it at that?

Earth-shine

(3,848 posts)
16. To delay. He's been stringing us along the whole time bringing us
Wed Jan 19, 2022, 12:18 AM
Jan 2022

closer and closer to the next election.

Earth-shine

(3,848 posts)
20. I believe he and Sinema want to damage Biden and the party.
Wed Jan 19, 2022, 12:59 AM
Jan 2022

Both think they'll be happier (or richer) with Republican majorities.

 

wellst0nev0ter

(7,509 posts)
3. So glad Manchin is not a flip-flopper when it comes to the filibuster
Tue Jan 18, 2022, 11:19 PM
Jan 2022
https://www.manchin.senate.gov/newsroom/press-releases/manchin-west-virginians-deserve-a-government-that-works-for-them


He cosponsored and voted in favor of S. RES. 10, which would have: eliminated the filibuster on motions to proceed to a debate on the substance of the bill; eliminated secret holds; allowed both the Majority Leader and the Minority Leader to offer up to three amendments on behalf of their members after cloture has been filed as long as the amendments are relevant; required that Senators who wish to filibuster a bill must actually take the floor and make remarks; and expedited the process for nominees that require Senate confirmation. The measure failed.



He cosponsored and voted in favor of S. RES. 21, which required that Senators who wish to filibuster a bill must actually take the floor and make remarks. The measure failed.

FBaggins

(26,693 posts)
5. He isn't
Tue Jan 18, 2022, 11:22 PM
Jan 2022

There’s a difference between supporting a thing (bill or rule) and being willing to blow up the filibuster to achieve that thing.

He has said multiple times (just in the last year) that he would support changes like requiring a speaking filibuster) but each time rejected attempts not force the change with a simple majority

FBaggins

(26,693 posts)
10. It does make sense
Tue Jan 18, 2022, 11:31 PM
Jan 2022

And made sense to everyone else until about 15 seconds ago (politically speaking)

He doesn’t support 51 votes making changes but supports 60 votes making changes - even for things that he would be one of the 51 for. It would actually be hypocritical to say “I’m for a lower standard for things that I want to pass”

 

wellst0nev0ter

(7,509 posts)
22. Yeah, only people who don't really want change
Wed Jan 19, 2022, 01:36 AM
Jan 2022

Would abide by a false barrier that they want to get rid of in the first place.

It goes double for those who could easily get rid of the process if they wanted to.

FBaggins

(26,693 posts)
23. Except he never said that
Wed Jan 19, 2022, 07:12 AM
Jan 2022

He never said that he wanted to get rid of the filibuster.

That confusion is common here. Many hear “talking filibuster” and interpret it to mean what Schumer is currently hinting at (i.e., Once they stop talking, 51 votes can pass the bill). Manchin has never supported that.

What he has supported is “making the filibuster more painful” - by which he means that you shouldn’t be able to block a bill by merely saying that 41 votes oppose it… and then not having a political consequences for blocking popular legislation. That if you refuse to cut off debate, then you actually have to debate and tell people why you’re opposing the legislation - so that the opposition can cost you elections if the voters disagree.

Consistent with that - he has in multiple prior occasions voted for cloture and tried to shame Republicans for their obstruction of a good bill. But that can’t rationally be spun as trying to kill the cloture standard currently in the rules

 

wellst0nev0ter

(7,509 posts)
26. Once again, from his campaign website
Wed Jan 19, 2022, 01:09 PM
Jan 2022
He cosponsored and voted in favor of S. RES. 21, which required that Senators who wish to filibuster a bill must actually take the floor and make remarks.


Sure sounds like a talking filibuster to me.

FBaggins

(26,693 posts)
27. Entirely missing from your link...
Wed Jan 19, 2022, 01:36 PM
Jan 2022

... anything that backs up his willingness to end the filibuster to reform the filibuster. Let alone anything close to Schumer's more recent trial balloon to try to use Rule XIX as a back-door stab at the same rule change.

It's also not the same "talking filibuster" that many are pushing for:


From the floor debate (Sen Merkeley)

There are some who said we must make sure we protect the rights of the minority. The talking filibuster does exactly that. We still need 60 votes to close debate. My colleague from Oregon, Senator WYDEN, was just here. If there were an issue affecting Oregon that we must oppose, the two of us alone could take and hold this floor back and forth to make sure this body doesn’t run over the rights of Oregon as long as we have the 40 colleagues with us to avoid cloture. That is the way it is now and that is the way it will be
under the talking filibuster.


I don't see anything inconsistent with that position and his current position.

uponit7771

(90,225 posts)
29. Except for the debt ceiling? Yeah, he's 100% full of shit and please with the 60 vote crap ...
Wed Jan 19, 2022, 01:48 PM
Jan 2022

... in the Wapos explanation.

If they REALLY had 60 votes, including some GQP, there was no need for the change !!

They could've just voted for start and end cloture with those 60 votes and be done with it.

Manchin and Synema are full of shit

FBaggins

(26,693 posts)
43. Were you really not paying attention at the time?
Wed Jan 19, 2022, 04:57 PM
Jan 2022

Schumer had backed himself into a corner by declaring that he wouldn't use reconciliation to raise the debt ceiling and McConnell had backed himself into a corner where republicans insisted that we had to go it alone.

They found a way for both to save face without technically breaking their previous positions. 60 votes allowed them to end the filibuster and democrats still had to raise the ceiling on their own. Everyone wins and everyone loses. Ten republicans get to vote for cloture without having to say that they voted for cloture... and we had to go it alone without actually relying on reconciliation.

But voting to proceed to the bill and voting for the bill are not at all inconsistent with a position that says that you shouldn't change to a 51 vote standard to proceed to the bill.

uponit7771

(90,225 posts)
44. Soooooo, Manchin changed filibuster rules for debt ceiling? Yes ... with "bypass" that he's
Wed Jan 19, 2022, 05:34 PM
Jan 2022

.... NOT stating he'll apply to voter rights.

FULL

OF

SHIT

FBaggins

(26,693 posts)
45. Nope
Wed Jan 19, 2022, 05:37 PM
Jan 2022

60 votes ended the filibuster.

Exactly the same as would be required to end it for voting rights.

FBaggins

(26,693 posts)
47. Why would Manchin need to say anything?
Wed Jan 19, 2022, 05:55 PM
Jan 2022

60 votes gets past a filibuster.

That's sorta how it works.

uponit7771

(90,225 posts)
48. Cause he has never declared he'd apply the same "bypass" to voting rights. He need to be explicit
Wed Jan 19, 2022, 05:58 PM
Jan 2022

... on that subject and so far he's not been.

Spell it out and stick to it, Manchin aint done that with voter rights and the "bypass" yet.

uponit7771

(90,225 posts)
28. Yeah, yeah ... he is. He was OK with changing filibuster rules for debt ceiling
Wed Jan 19, 2022, 01:45 PM
Jan 2022

He's at minimum being deceptive and just using strict double talk to hide the deception.

For instance he doesn't want the voting rights bill and stated that MULTPLE times first half of last year.

He's now using the filibuster as cover for that, the lie or deception here is to hang on to the filibuster vs stating what he really wants and that's to keep the voting laws the way they are.

qazplm135

(7,447 posts)
31. So why didn't his vote
Wed Jan 19, 2022, 04:12 PM
Jan 2022

To do it for the debt ceiling"blow up the filibuster?"

Such a disingenuous argument.

qazplm135

(7,447 posts)
35. Baloney
Wed Jan 19, 2022, 04:17 PM
Jan 2022

He never said I won't vote to do this if the Republicans don't vote for cloture. It was VERY clear all fifty were willing to go alone if they didn't because it would have broken the country fiscally otherwise.

You know this but once again you play the Manchin is right role because you're cool with what he's doing.

FBaggins

(26,693 posts)
36. Substituting a cloture vote that requires 60 votes with a different process vote...
Wed Jan 19, 2022, 04:27 PM
Jan 2022

...that also requires 60 votes and can itself be filibustered is not "blowing up the filibuster".


He never said I won't vote to do this if the Republicans don't vote for cloture.

??? How does that even make sense? He has said that he opposes changing the rules such that 41 senators can no longer block legislation. And he didn't. If 41 senators had opposed the budget gimmick that accelerated the time required for the debt ceiling increase, it wouldn't have passed.

qazplm135

(7,447 posts)
37. Lol
Wed Jan 19, 2022, 04:31 PM
Jan 2022

He said "you can't play games with the debt ceiling."

So you really think that next time if Republicans refuse to do it, he'll say welp we tried, let's destroy the economy to protect the filibuster?

Of course he won't. Everyone knows he won't. He just got bailed out because a bare number of Republicans agreed last time.

And if somehow he does stick to it, then it will be the worst economic calamity of our existence as a country. So again of course he will as will Sinema.

We all know this but you're playing the defend those two at all costs game you always play.

FBaggins

(26,693 posts)
38. You appear to "know" so many things that lack any rational support/basis
Wed Jan 19, 2022, 04:36 PM
Jan 2022

Most people require chemical "enhancement" to achieve such wisdom. It must be so convenient to just declare what everyone else thinks and would do. Strawman much?

There isn't any evidence at all that he would support blowing up the filibuster for the debt ceiling when he had already admitted that we were going to need to use reconciliation to accomplish it.

This was a deal between republican and democratic leadership that intentionally gave cover to members on both sides. It isn't at all the same thing as changing a rule through "nuclear" means.

The fact that you can keep opining on the filibuster while ignoring the difference between 51 votes and 60+ is baffling... but also entertaining.

qazplm135

(7,447 posts)
39. Yawn
Wed Jan 19, 2022, 04:43 PM
Jan 2022

You have two choices, he's either so wedded to the filibuster that he'd destroy the economy to do so or he's not

Of course, you'd defend either decision he'd make lol

FBaggins

(26,693 posts)
41. There's that imagination again
Wed Jan 19, 2022, 04:50 PM
Jan 2022

There was no need to destroy the filibuster to avoid destroying the economy. The filibuster already has an exception for reconciliation for debt ceiling increases. We always had the power to get it done. We just wanted the brinksmanship.

It's an entirely irrelevant example - and one suspects that you knew that all along. But I won't play that game.

FBaggins

(26,693 posts)
4. No. Most rule changes are by much larger majorities
Tue Jan 18, 2022, 11:20 PM
Jan 2022

The two “nuclear” changes were lower- but he voted against those

ColinC

(8,227 posts)
11. Which is precedent for doing the thing he said there is no precedent for, no?
Tue Jan 18, 2022, 11:34 PM
Jan 2022


Or is he referring to another thing in regards to "precedent"?

Calista241

(5,584 posts)
12. The thin line everyone recognizes is that those modifications were for executive and judicial
Tue Jan 18, 2022, 11:42 PM
Jan 2022

branch nominees and their confirmation. The Legislative filibuster, which is what we're talking about here with voting rights, hasn't been broken since the filibuster's inception.

ColinC

(8,227 posts)
14. Ah! So it has been for a different "thing"
Tue Jan 18, 2022, 11:51 PM
Jan 2022

Of course, the exception made for the tax law didn't fall under the modification you point out, but rather for a specific thing. There was also a recent exception made to vote for Mike Lee's amendment with a 51 vote exception when amendments typically need 60 votes to pass. There was also the exception made to the debt ceiling that allowed only 51 votes to pass without 60 votes to get it. There is plenty of precedent for making an exception -with nominees, with tax laws and with the debt ceiling. To say that a voting rights bill doesn't make the cut is just sillly...

There is not a specific precedent to voting rights, but there is a precedent to making exceptions in order to get things done. All of the above qualifies, and at the end of the day if Manchin actually wanted voting rights to pass, he would vote for this modification.

Calista241

(5,584 posts)
18. The debt ceiling provision still had to pass a cloture vote.
Wed Jan 19, 2022, 12:27 AM
Jan 2022

And 14 Repubs voted for cloture, even if some or all of them didn’t support final passage of the bill. Voting for cloture, while voting against a bill, has been a common practice for decades.

Tax laws, and other ‘budgetary’ changes can be passed through reconciliation, which only requires a majority to pass.

Polybius

(15,235 posts)
6. Look what he just said
Tue Jan 18, 2022, 11:23 PM
Jan 2022
“The majority of my colleagues in the Democratic caucus have changed their minds. I respect that. They have a right to change their minds. I haven’t. I hope they respect that too. I’ve never changed my mind on the filibuster,” Manchin said.


https://www.democraticunderground.com/10142855245

BlueIdaho

(13,582 posts)
13. That disingenuous SOB
Tue Jan 18, 2022, 11:44 PM
Jan 2022

Doesn’t care about any of this shit. Instead of making the lives of his own constituents better and fighting for those without, he has his staff spending their time researching chaff he can throw up to obscure his lack of patriotism and his greed for the almighty dollar.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Joe Manchin said there is...