As debt ceiling vote looms, Democrats reconsider filibuster

WASHINGTON – With a federal default expected in less than two weeks, leading Senate Democrats increasingly see the Republican blockade on raising the federal debt limit as a clear rationale for changing the chamber obstruction rule , a long-term effort which until now has not been unanimous in their ranks necessary to succeed.

President Biden, who sent mixed signals for months on whether he supported removing the filibuster, gave the idea new impetus on Tuesday when he told reporters at the White House that ‘it was a “real possibility” that Democrats could create an exception to the rules and allow the debt ceiling to be raised by a simple majority.

Republicans were due to block Democrats’ latest efforts to raise the government’s legal borrowing limit on Wednesday so it can continue to pay its bills, with 12 days before the Treasury Department’s Oct. 18 date to hit the limit. Kentucky Republican and Minority Leader Senator Mitch McConnell said Democrats, who control Congress and the Presidency and propose billions of dollars in future spending, must provide all the votes for such an increase, but he and other Republicans have obstructed their attempts to do so.

Under longstanding Senate rules, any member can object to the end of debate on a bill, a practice known as filibuster which effectively stops a bill in its tracks unless supporters can’t muster a three-fifths majority – or 60 votes – to move it forward. In the 50-50 Senate, that means Democrats need at least 10 Republicans to join them in breaking an obstruction, on measuring the debt ceiling or whatever.

Democrats, who discussed the prospect at a private lunch on Tuesday ahead of Mr Biden’s comments, say Republican intransigence on the debt limit has provided the best argument yet to curb filibuster .

“More and more people are drawing this conclusion,” said Sen. Richard J. Durbin, Democrat of Illinois, the Second Democrat. “I think people think the qualified majority on the debt ceiling is a bridge too far.”

Yet, it is not clear whether enough people are drawing this conclusion. The main obstacle to changing the filibuster has been resistance from centrist Democratic Senators Joe Manchin III of West Virginia and Kyrsten Sinema of Arizona, and there is no indication that they changed their position in response to the drama. current debt limit.

They argue that the procedural weapon can promote bipartisanship and provide safeguards against either party acting too extreme. Mr Manchin earlier this week dismissed the idea of ​​any change in filibustering the debt limit, but at Tuesday’s private lunch he and Ms Sinema remained silent on the issue. Mr Manchin also said the government should not be allowed to default.

Democrats urging a change in filibuster rules said they hoped the nature of the debt-limit struggle, with widespread warnings of global economic calamity if the government defaults and Republicans’ refusal to negotiating, would persuade the two Democrats that it was time to put their worries aside. and act.

“Republicans are making their case stronger than I could a million times on the ground,” said Senator Richard Blumenthal, a Democrat from Connecticut and longtime nemesis of filibuster. “What they’re doing is filibustering and exposing the filibuster completely. And that’s not just an inconvenience. It’s hopelessly dangerous.

Democrats could change the rules through a series of ground maneuvers with the votes of all of their 50 members and the decisive vote of Vice President Kamala Harris. They say any “exclusion” from the debt limit would apply specifically to this legislation and not extend to other measures. But any move to change the filibuster would intensify calls to weaken it for other Democratic priorities that Republicans consistently block, including a voting rights measure that Democrats say is urgent to offset Republicans’ efforts. at the state level to prevent the voting of minorities and others. .

Mr McConnell threatened to cripple the Senate if Democrats undermine the filibuster. He has repeatedly stated that Democrats should instead use the budget process known as reconciliation to raise the debt limit, which would allow them to take advantage of rules that protect some tax laws from obstruction.

“There’s already an exclusion where Democrats can do it on their own – it’s called reconciliation,” Utah Republican Senator Mitt Romney said on Twitter.

But Democrats say the reconciliation process would take too long and is not guaranteed to succeed when the threat of default looms and the nation’s credit could be eroded at any time. They say if Republicans don’t want to vote to increase federal borrowing power, they should just allow Democrats to do it themselves.

“Look, the best way to do this is to just get Republicans out of the way,” New York Democrat and Majority Leader Sen. Chuck Schumer said on Tuesday. “None of them have to vote for a debt ceiling; let the 50 Democrats do it.

Activists have been calling throughout the year for Democrats to get rid of the filibuster so they can advance the party’s agenda while retaining control of Congress and the White House. They seized the debt ceiling deadlock as a new weapon.

“Senate Democrats are rushing for an easy choice,” said Eli Zupnick, spokesperson for the anti-obstruction group Fix Our Senate. “Allow Senator McConnell to explode the economy or finally tackle the outdated and abused parliamentary obstruction that empowers him to do so.” “

Lawmakers have warned that any change to the filibuster could have far-reaching effects and provoke retaliation from the opposing party.

In 2013, Democrats frustrated by a Republican blockade of President Barack Obama’s presidential candidates changed the rules to allow candidates to advance on a simple majority vote. Democrats exempted Supreme Court candidates from the change, but Republicans in 2017 quickly applied the new rules to the High Court, allowing President Donald J. Trump to serve on three new Supreme Court justices during his tenure.

Lawmakers also say ending the filibuster would allow one side to erase legislation enacted by the other when it takes power.

“It’s dangerous for both parties,” said Sen. Richard Shelby, Republican of Alabama.