Over two years after the Supreme Court, influenced by Republican-appointed justices, overturned Roe v. Wade, Vice President Kamala Harris is advocating for the restoration of reproductive rights. In June 2022, she stated, “If the filibuster gets in the way, the Senate needs to make an exception to get this done.”
Harris reiterated her stance during a recent interview with Wisconsin Public Radio, emphasizing the need to eliminate the filibuster for abortion rights legislation, stating, “We should eliminate the filibuster for Roe to ensure that 51 votes would suffice to reinstate the protections for reproductive freedom, allowing every individual, especially women, to make their own health decisions without government interference.”
Senator Joe Manchin, an independent from West Virginia who has been contemplating a potential endorsement for his former party’s presidential ticket, recently expressed disapproval of Harris’s position. In a statement to CNN, Manchin criticized Harris, saying, “Shame on her… She knows the filibuster is the Holy Grail of democracy.” Manchin is not seeking re-election, and his withdrawal of a possible endorsement is expected to have minimal impact on the upcoming race, especially since the Democratic ticket is not aiming to win votes in his home state.
While the significance of Manchin’s remarks regarding the filibuster is worthy of discussion, it highlights a disconnect with historical facts. Manchin has previously claimed that the filibuster has been a Senate tradition for 232 years, which overlooks the fact that it was not part of the Senate when it was established in 1789. Initially, a simple majority was enough to pass legislation, a method that equipped the Senate to function effectively for many years.
Adam Jentleson, a former aide to former Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, has pointed out comments from the Founding Fathers, including James Madison, who argued against the idea of legislative supermajorities, noting that it undermined the principle of majority rule. Alexander Hamilton also criticized the notion that supermajority requirements would foster compromise, suggesting that it could lead to prolonged standoffs and undermine the public good.
While critics like Manchin can argue their perspective on legislative practices, it is inaccurate to claim that their beliefs are rooted in the historical tradition of the Senate. Advocates for filibuster reform seek to revert the Senate to its former operational state rather than alter it fundamentally.
Regarding the claim that the filibuster is essential for safeguarding democracy, many argue that the current state of excessive filibuster use creates obstacles for passing popular legislation even when one party controls both chambers and the presidency. Instead of protecting democracy, these procedures can hinder it.
Former President Donald Trump praised Manchin’s comments, stating, “Congratulations to Senator Joe Manchin for not endorsing Radical Kamala Harris because of her DEATH WISH for the Filibuster and the Rule of Law.” However, this statement is somewhat ironic, as Trump himself has also advocated for eliminating the Senate’s filibuster rule in the past.