Joe Manchin Shows Cracks In His Opposition To The For The People Act and The Senate Filibuster

Sen. Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.) met with a group of Texas Democratic lawmakers on Wednesday to discuss voting rights, one day after he missed a Democratic caucus lunch where the group briefed senators.

Thanks to Rep.’s Cuellar, Green & Garcia who helped facilitate a very positive meeting w/ Sen. @JoeManchinWV who agreed that the right to vote is fundamental. Working together we’ll find a pathway forward to protect #votingrights of all Americans & protect our democracy! #txlege pic.twitter.com/uyUrM203u2

Advertisement

— José Menéndez (@Menendez4Texas) June 16, 2021

The Hill reports, Manchin meets with Texas lawmakers on voting rights:

Manchin met with Texas state Sen. Royce West (D); Texas state Rep. Chris Turner (D); Texas state Sen. Jose Menendez (D); Texas state Rep. Nicole Collier (D), the chairwoman of the Texas Legislative Black Caucus; and Texas state Rep. Jessica Gonzalez, the vice chairwoman of the Texas House Elections Committee, a spokesperson for the Democratic senator told The Hill.

Democratic Reps. Henry Cuellar (Texas), Al Green (Texas) and Sylvia Garcia (Texas) also attended and helped facilitate the meeting.

“Thanks to Rep.’s Cuellar, Green & Garcia who helped facilitate a very positive meeting,” Menendez tweeted after the meeting, adding that Manchin “agreed that the right to vote is fundamental.”

Turner added that it was a “great meeting” and that they had a “in-depth, positive discussion about how we best protect the rights of all voters.”

The group of Texas lawmakers is in Washington, D.C., this week to meet with senators and Vice President Harris after Texas Democrats staged a walkout late last month to prevent the advancement of a bill that would place new restrictions on voting.

The meeting with Manchin comes after a group met with his staff on Tuesday.

They also spoke at a closed-door Senate Democratic Conference lunch on Tuesday. Manchin missed the meeting, sparking fierce criticism from progressives. It was the latest meeting where voting rights were discussed that Manchin has missed, citing scheduling conflicts.

Manchin’s closed-door sit-down with the Texas lawmakers is the latest meeting he’s had in recent weeks as he faces intense pressure to figure out a way to support the For the People Act, a sweeping bill that he has said he can’t back as it’s currently drafted.

Democrats are weeks deep into a frantic behind-the-scenes effort to try to cut a deal on the bill that Manchin could support. That would at least let them unify their caucus on the floor next week.

The Washington Post reports, Manchin outlines demands on voting legislation, creating an opening for potential Democratic compromise:

Sen. Joe Manchin III, the lone Senate Democrat who is not sponsoring a sweeping voting rights and campaign finance bill, has outlined for the first time a list of policy demands on election legislation — what the hell is this, a hostage taking? — opening the door to a possible compromise that could counter a bevy of Republican-passed laws that have rolled back ballot access in numerous states.

A three-page memo circulated by Manchin’s office this week indicates the West Virginia centrist’s willingness to support key provisions of the For the People Act, the marquee Democratic bill that the House passed in March — including provisions mandating at least two weeks of early voting and measures meant to eliminate partisan gerrymandering of congressional districts.

But Manchin’s memo also sketches out several provisions that have historically been opposed by most Democrats, including backing an ID requirement for voters and the ability of local election officials to purge voter rolls using other government records.

According to two Democratic aides familiar with Manchin’s views, he has also signaled to colleagues that he opposes a public financing system for congressional elections that has emerged as one of the most controversial parts of the For the People Act. The aides spoke on the condition of anonymity to describe Manchin’s private communications with other lawmakers.

Surprise! Stacey Abrams says she supports Manchin’s voting rights compromise:

Stacey Abrams said on CNN Thursday that she could “absolutely” support the policy demands that Sen. Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.) has outlined for a compromise on voting reform.

What she’s saying: “What Sen. Manchin is putting forward are some basic building blocks we need to ensure that democracy is accessible no matter your geography,” Abrams said.

• • • “Those provisions that he is setting forth are strong ones that will create a level playing field, will create standards that do not vary from state to state and, I think, will ensure that every American has improved access to the right to vote despite the onslaught of state legislation seeking to restrict access to the right to vote.”
    • Abrams called it a misconception fueled by Republicans that Democrats are opposed to voter ID: “No one has ever objected to having to prove who you are to vote. It’s been part of our nation’s history since the inception of voting. What’s been problematic is the type of restrictive I.D. that we’ve seen pop up.”
    • “This is a first and important step to preserving our democracy. … If Joe Manchin and the U.S. senators who support this legislation are willing to come together on a compromise, then we will make progress.”

Back to The Post:

[B]efore detailing his policy views on the For the People Act, Manchin had cited the lack of GOP support for the legislation in explaining his misgivings. And, on Wednesday, he told reporters that he continued to think that Republican support was necessary: “You should not pass any type of a voter bill in the most divisive time of our life,” he said. “Unless you have some unity on this thing, because you just divide the country further.”

He would not say, however, whether the provisions he has sketched out could win their support. “I have no clue — you’ll have to speak to them,” he said, calling the memo a list of “things that we’re already doing and we’ve been doing in many states and in my state.”

Well, “Clueless,” let me help you out here: Republicans are not that into you. Get it through your thick skull that the “Grim Reaper of Democracy,” Mitch McConnell, will reject any voting rights bill you put forward because the GQP is the Party of Voter Suppression. And McConnell really hates Stacey Abrams. Goddamnit, how do you not know this by now? McConnell rejects Manchin’s voting rights compromise:

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) announced Thursday that he opposes the compromise on Democrats’ sweeping voting rights bill proposed by Sen. Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.).

Why it matters: Voting legislation requires 60 votes to pass in the Senate. Without Republican support, it is unlikely to pass. Manchin is the sole Democratic senator who has not signed on to the For the People Act, insisting that it’s too partisan.

The big picture: Manchin’s proposed compromise includes banning partisan gerrymandering, requiring voter ID, having at least 15 consecutive days of early voting, and making Election Day a public holiday. Stacey Abrams, a leading Democratic voice on voting rights, said Thursday she would support the plan.

What he’s saying: “Senate Democrats seem to have reached a so-called ‘compromise’ election takeover among themselves. In reality, the plan endorsed by Stacey Abrams is no compromise,” McConnell said.

• • • “It still subverts the First Amendment to supercharge cancel culture and the left’s name-and-shame campaign model. It takes redistricting away from state legislatures and hands it over to computers.”
    • “And it still retains S1’s rotten core: an assault on the fundamental idea that states, not the federal government, should decide how to run their own elections.”

The “Grim Reaper of Democracy,” Mitch McConnell, is irredeemably evil. There is no negotiating with a domestic terrorist who wants to destroy American democracy and replace it with a kleptocracy of wealthy oligarchs, like Russia.

The Post adds:

Manchin also said Wednesday that he has not changed his views against eliminating the filibuster, the 60-vote supermajority requirement for most Senate bills, meaning the bill would have to garner some GOP support to be viable.

Maybe not. The Intercept reports, LEAKED AUDIO OF SEN. JOE MANCHIN CALL WITH BILLIONAIRE DONORS PROVIDES RARE GLIMPSE OF DEALMAKING ON FILIBUSTER AND JANUARY 6 COMMISSION:

The meeting was hosted by the group No Labels, a big money operation co-founded by former Sen. Joe Lieberman that funnels high-net-worth donor money to conservative Democrats and moderate Republicans. Among the gathering’s newsworthy revelations: Manchin described an openness to filibuster reform at odds with his most recent position that will buoy some Democrats’ hopes for enacting their agenda.

[T]he wide-ranging conversation went into depth on the fate of the filibuster, infrastructure negotiations, and the failed effort to create a bipartisan commission to explore the January 6 storming of the U.S. Capitol, and offers a frank glimpse into the thinking of the conservative Democrat who holds the party’s fate in his hands.

Manchin told the assembled donors that he needed help flipping a handful of Republicans from no to yes on the January 6 commission in order to strip the “far left” of their best argument against the filibuster. The filibuster is a critical priority for the donors on the call, as it bottles up progressive legislation that would hit their bottom lines.

* * *

No Labels is passionately supportive of the filibuster, and when multiple donors quizzed Manchin on his stance on it, the senator displayed an openness to reform that is at odds with his latest public statements.

Last spring, he said that he could be supportive of a “talking filibuster” that required the minority to hold the floor, rather than putting the onus on the majority. After an uproar from Republicans, he penned a Washington Post op-ed saying that he would not “weaken or eliminate” the filibuster, which optimists noted left room for reforms that strengthened it in spirit, by forcing more bipartisanship.

In June, he told CNN, when asked if he was committed to maintaining the 60-vote threshold, that he wanted to “make the Senate work,” a sentiment he repeated each time he was pressed. Once again, he followed it up with an op-ed, this time in the local Charleston Gazette-Mail, saying that he had no intention of weakening the filibuster.

Manchin’s openness for filibuster reform on the call is notable given it flew in the face of many attendees’ hopes. Asked about a proposal to lower the threshold to beat back a filibuster to 55 votes, he said that it was something he was considering, but then quickly referred back to his earlier idea of forcing the minority to show up on the Senate floor in large enough numbers to maintain a filibuster.

“That’s that’s one of many good, good suggestions I’ve had,” he said of lowering the cloture total from 60 to 55. Manchin went on to discuss the last time the cloture threshold was lowered, in the 1970s.

“I looked back … when it went from 67 votes to 60 votes, and also what was happening, what made them think that it needed to change. So I’m open to looking at it, I’m just not open to getting rid of the filibuster, that’s all,” he said.

Manchin acknowledged that publicly he had drawn a line at 60, but said that he was open to other ideas. “Right now, 60 is where I planted my flag, but as long as they know that I’m going to protect this filibuster, we’re looking at good solutions,” he said. “I think, basically, it should be [that] 41 people have to force the issue versus the 60 that we need in the affirmative. So find 41 in the negative. … I think one little change that could be made right now is basically anyone who wants to filibuster ought to be required to go to the floor and basically state your objection and why you’re filibustering and also state what you think needs to change that’d fix it, so you would support it. To me, that’s pretty constructive.”

MSNBC’s Lawrence O’Donnell interviewed former senator Al Franken and political scientist Norman Ornstein about the leaked audio, and their proposal to reform the Senate filibuster rule echoed by Manchin in his comments.

The op-ed by Al Franken and Norman Ornstein in the Minneapolis Star Tribune from February. Al Franken, Norman Ornstein: Make the filibuster great again (excerpt):

What to do now? Flip the numbers. Instead of requiring 60 votes to end debate, require 41 to continue debate. Then, the majority leader could call votes any time the Senate was in session, and the minority would have to show up. Including for votes at 3 a.m. or 4 a.m., coming off their lumpy cots off the Senate floor. Around the clock. Including 87-year-old Chuck Grassley and both 86-year-olds Richard Shelby and Jim Inhofe. And soon-to-be-79-year-old Mitch McConnell. No Mondays off while only the majority had to be there. Weekends in D.C., including for the 17 Republicans up for re-election in 2022, who want to be back home campaigning.

This kind of simple change would not eliminate filibusters. In fact, it would restore their original purpose — for the minority to demonstrate when it really cares about something, maybe even leading to, oh, constructive compromises. It would take away the incentive to use the tactic on every bill as a delaying device and begin to limit its use to high profile legislation.

Joe Manchin and Kyrsten Sinema have made clear that they are adamantly opposed to eliminating the filibuster. OK. Great! They revere the tradition of a minority willing to go, literally, to the mattresses for something they believe deeply. So they should be enthusiastic about supporting a rule that provides just that.

See also, Norman Ornstein’s op-ed in the Washington Post from March, Democrats can’t kill the filibuster. But they can gut it.

The Post concludes:

Schumer reiterated Wednesday that the Senate would vote on election legislation next week, but he has not detailed precisely what bill he will seek to advance. It is also unclear whether Schumer would delay a vote to reach an accord with Manchin.

Senate Democrats are expected to discuss next steps at a caucus meeting Thursday.

“These conversations are ongoing, and we’re going to come to an agreement, and we’re going to move this forward,” said one Democratic aide familiar with the talks.

Now that the “Grim Reaper of Democracy,” Mitch McConnell, has essentially spit in Joe Manchin’s face rejecting his list of demands on voting rights, Manchin needs to fall in line and agree to support S.1, the For The People Act next week, and also to support reform of the Senate filibuster rule to do it.