WaPo Opinion: Busting the filibuster for abortion now is madness [View all]

[question everything]

I don't know who the WaPo James Hohmann is, but I think he is raising important points:

Democrats hoping to change the rules of the Senate in a futile bid to pass a federal law protecting abortion rights are displaying the most myopic political thinking since liberals called for defunding the police. Then, as now, their anger was righteous and raw. Millions of Americans took to the streets in the spring of 2020 to protest systemic racism after the murder of George Floyd in Minneapolis. But the shortsighted demands to divert resources from law enforcement continue to hobble Democrats who never even embraced the idea. Revising the filibuster will hurt even more in the long term.

The left’s thirst for Senate Democrats to do something about Dobbs is understandable, but the reality is that weakening the filibuster would simply open the door for Republicans to pass their own, far-more-punitive federal restrictions once they inevitably return to power. Sen. Kyrsten Sinema (D-Ariz.) points to seven bills restricting abortion rights that would have passed the Senate in recent years had it not been for the 60-vote threshold necessary to overcome a filibuster. With Roe gone, Sinema says the filibuster is “more important now than ever.”

Republican visions of an abortion-free America will turn very real if the Democrats pursue this goal. Just two years ago, when Donald Trump was president, 53 senators voted to advance a 20-week abortion ban and 56 senators backed a Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act, which would have created criminal penalties for doctors who failed to follow new federal standards after procedures went awry. In 2015, 53 senators voted to ban federal funding for Planned Parenthood. In 2006, 57 senators voted to make it a federal crime to transport a minor across state lines to get an abortion without notifying her parents in advance.

Democrats should have learned this lesson by now. In 2013, then-Senate Majority Leader Harry M. Reid (D-Nev.) wrangled the votes to get rid of the filibuster for most presidential nominations, but he insisted it would not apply to the Supreme Court. That opened the door in 2017 for his successor as majority leader, Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.), to remove the high court exemption so he could confirm Justice Neil M. Gorsuch. If Reid had left the original 60-vote threshold in place for all nominations, Justice Amy Coney Barrett — who cast the deciding vote to overturn Roe — might not have been confirmed on the eve of the 2020 election.


More..

https://wapo.st/3yLnpwP