Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer was asked a simple question Wednesday: Would he support blowing up the legislative filibuster?
Schumer would not say no. He pivoted to his party’s agenda, then walked away as a reporter pressed him for a direct answer.
That caption goes beyond what the video establishes. Schumer made no formal announcement; he refused to rule out killing the filibuster when he had every opportunity to give a one-word answer.
Here is the longer post carrying the exchange:
The wording matters. Refusing to rule something out is not the same as announcing a plan, yet it tells Americans that one of the Senate’s biggest institutional questions remains open.
Schumer’s own victory remarks reinforce that distinction. In the official Senate Democratic transcript, he celebrated a new majority and promised that relief was on the way after what he called a generational remake of the Senate map.
He identified costs, chaos and corruption as the three issues voters had rejected. He also argued that Democrats had won across red, blue and purple states and now had to deliver change.
The prepared remarks did not mention abolishing the filibuster. They did not lay out a vote, a timetable or a caucus agreement to change Senate rules.
That leaves the hallway exchange as a warning sign, not a formal declaration. When a reporter supplied the direct question, Schumer answered with his legislative priorities and exited instead of closing the door.
The rule at stake is enormous. The U.S. Senate’s official history explains that a filibuster can prolong debate and prevent a vote unless the chamber invokes cloture.
Since 1975, ending debate on most legislation has required three-fifths of the full Senate, normally 60 votes. That threshold forces a majority party to attract some support from the other side for many major bills.
The Senate has already lowered the threshold for executive and judicial nominations through precedents commonly called the nuclear option. Extending that approach to legislation would hand a bare majority far more power to move bills without minority support.
Such a change could affect taxes, spending, election law, statehood proposals and any other priority that can survive the rest of the legislative process. It would also establish a weapon that Republicans could use the next time they hold the same majority.
The political arithmetic suddenly makes the question urgent. The Associated Press called the Democratic Senate victory a decisive rebuke of Republican governance and reported that the party had secured at least 54 seats.
That gives Democrats a working majority but leaves them below the 60 votes normally needed to overcome a legislative filibuster. Any attempt to change the precedent would still require sufficient unity inside their own caucus.
Control of the House and Senate also creates a new era of divided government with President Trump in the White House. Democrats can advance legislation through Congress, but ordinary bills still face a presidential veto unless they can assemble the much larger coalition needed to override it.
The election result nevertheless gives Schumer control over the Senate floor, committees and scheduling. His refusal to answer therefore carries more weight today than the same dodge would have carried from the minority.
Republicans now have every reason to demand an answer before the first rule fight arrives. Voters deserve to know whether Democrats intend to work within the 60-vote framework or erase it when it becomes inconvenient.
The accurate headline is not that Schumer has already nuked the filibuster. It is that the incoming Senate leader was asked directly, refused to rule it out and walked away.
That is more than enough reason to watch what he does next.
This is a Guest Post from our friends over at WLTReport. View the original article here.
The post WATCH: Chuck Schumer Refuses to Rule Out Nuking the Filibuster After Democrats Take Senate appeared first on 100PercentFedUp.com.
Continue reading...
[H/T 100PercentFedUp]