Tangle - Kamala Harris’s filibuster comments

Episode Date: September 26, 2024

On Monday, Vice President Kamala Harris said she supports eliminating the Senate’s filibuster rule to pursue legislation codifying abortion access nationwide. The comments, made in an interview with Wisconsin Public Radio after a campaign stop in the state, mark the first time Harris has called for an end to the filibuster since she became the 2024 Democratic nominee, though she has supported similar proposals in the past. You can read today's podcast⁠ ⁠⁠here⁠⁠⁠, our “Under the Radar” story ⁠here and today’s “Have a nice day” story ⁠here⁠.You can watch the replay of our live stream of the Harris Trump debate with commentary from Isaac on our YouTube Channel!Check out Episode 6 of our podcast series, The Undecideds. You can subscribe to Tangle by clicking here or drop something in our tip jar by clicking here. Help share Tangle.I'm a firm believer that our politics would be a little bit better if everyone were reading balanced news that allows room for debate, disagreement, and multiple perspectives. If you can take 15 seconds to share Tangle with a few friends I'd really appreciate it. Email Tangle to a friend here, share Tangle on X/Twitter here, or share Tangle on Facebook here.Take the survey: What do you think of abolishing the filibuster? Let us know!Our podcast is written by Isaac Saul and edited and engineered by Dewey Thomas. Music for the podcast was produced by Diet 75. Our newsletter is edited by Managing Editor Ari Weitzman, Will Kaback, Bailey Saul, Sean Brady, and produced in conjunction with Tangle’s social media manager Magdalena Bokowa, who also created our logo. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Got a mortgage? Chances are you're thinking about your payments right now. Need help? Ask your bank about relief measures that may be available to you. Learn more at Canada.ca slash it pays to know. A message from the Government of Canada. From Searchlight Pictures comes A Real Pain, one of the most moving and funny films of the year. Written and directed by Oscar-nominated Jesse Eisenberg and starring Eisenberg and Emmy Award winner Kieran Culkin, A Real Pain is a comedy about mismatched cousins who reunite for a tour through Poland to honor their beloved grandmother. The adventure takes a turn when the pair's old tensions resurface against the backdrop of their family history.

A Real Pain was one of the buzziest titles at Sundance Film Festival this year, garnering rave reviews and acclaim from both critics and audiences alike. See A Real Pain only in theaters November 15th. Based on Charles Yu's award-winning book, Interior Chinatown follows the story of Willis Wu, a background character trapped in a police procedural who dreams about a world beyond Chinatown. When he inadvertently becomes a witness to a crime, Willis begins to unravel a criminal web, his family's buried history, and what it feels like to be in the spotlight. Interior Chinatown is streaming November 19th, only on Disney+. From executive producer Isaac Saul, this is Tangle. Good morning, good afternoon, and good evening, and welcome to the Tangle Podcast, the place we get views from across the political spectrum,

some independent thinking, and a little bit of my take. I am your host, Isaac Saul. Today is Thursday, September 26th, and we are going to be talking about Kamala Harris and her promise to abolish the filibuster in order to pass abortion access legislation. We're going to talk precisely about what she said, and I'm going to share some of my views on whether it's smart politics or not. Spoiler alert, I don't think it is. A quick heads up before we do, though, two things. First of all, I know many of you have been waiting for this. We finally have a date where we are going to be launching ad-free podcasts. That's right. October 1st, that's Tuesday next week, we should be turning on ad-free podcasts.

I'm hoping that the next day we'll give it a test run. We'll make sure we upload the podcast and it works and everything is functioning the way it's supposed to. And then we're going to send an email to our newsletter subscribers with a heads up about the podcast, and then we'll announce it here in the pod with instructions about how to subscribe. It should be quite easy. We're working with a really popular, awesome company that works with a lot of other really big podcasters. And I'm super excited about it. I know this is something a lot of people have been asking for, and I know ads can be annoying. They're part of our business model, obviously on the podcast. But if people decide to subscribe to get those ad-free podcasts,

it helps us make money and create sustainable business model for us. And it gives you what you want. So it's a win-win. We're super pumped. Along with that, we're going to be adding some subscribers only, members only podcast content,

which I'm also super excited about. So we are there. We're on the two-yard line. We've got one or two more plays to run to get the ball in the end zone, but we're right on the doorstep. So hopefully this time next week, you'll all be able to listen to the pod without ads if you want. All right, with that out of the way, I'm going to pass it off to John for today's main topic, and I'll be back for my take. Thanks, Isaac, and welcome, everybody. Here are your quick hits for today. First up, New York City Mayor Eric Adams was indicted in a federal corruption investigation, according to a report from the New York Times. The charges have not yet been made public. Number two, Congress voted to pass a stopgap funding bill to keep the government funded for three months. President Biden is

expected to sign the bill today. Number three, the Israeli military's top commander told his troops they should prepare for a ground invasion of Lebanon in the near future. Separately, President Joe Biden and French President Emmanuel Macron released a joint statement calling for a ground invasion of Lebanon in the near future. Separately, President Joe Biden and French President Emmanuel Macron released a joint statement calling for a temporary ceasefire between Israel and Hezbollah. Nine other countries and the European Union also endorsed the statement. On Thursday, Israel rejected the ceasefire proposal. Number four, President Biden announced an $8 billion military aid package for Ukraine during a visit with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky.

Number five, the National Hurricane Center expects Hurricane Helene to strengthen to a Category 3 storm and make landfall along Florida's Gulf Coast on Thursday evening. Number six, Google filed an antitrust complaint with the European Commission against Microsoft, accusing Microsoft of stifling competition in the cloud computing industry. And number seven, Los Angeles police arrested a gunman who hijacked a city bus and led police on a chase throughout downtown Los Angeles. One bus passenger was killed in the incident.

Kamala Harris promising to end the filibuster in order to protect abortion, earning her the ire of Senator Joe Manchin, the West Virginia centrist, a former Democrat, Democrat for many decades, but now officially an independent, says that Harris has lost his endorsement given this declaration. On Monday, Vice President Kamala Harris said she supports eliminating the Senate's filibuster rule to pursue legislation codifying abortion access nationwide. The comments, made in an interview with Wisconsin Public Radio after a campaign stop in the state, marked the first time Harris has called for an end to the filibuster since she became the 2024 Democratic nominee, though she has supported similar proposals in the past.

The Senate functions primarily on unanimous consent, meaning that if a single senator objects to a measure being considered by the chamber, the entire Senate has to stop and address the senator's concern. These objections sometimes take the form of a filibuster, which originally meant speaking until the session ended to prevent a vote. The term now refers to any effort to delay or prevent a vote on a bill, resolution, amendment, or other debatable question. Before 1917, the Senate did not have any process to override a filibuster, but that year it adopted a rule that a two-thirds majority vote for cloture could do so. In 1975, the number of votes required for cloture was reduced to three-fifths of the

Senate, or 60 votes. In 2013, Senate Democrats eliminated the filibuster for executive and judicial branch nominees, excluding the Supreme Court, and in 2017, Senate Republicans eliminated it for Supreme Court nominees. Since then, the Democratic senators have pushed to end the filibuster entirely, which would only require 50 votes, plus a tie-breaking vote from the vice president, since Senate rule changes cannot be filibustered themselves. If the filibuster were to be removed, a simple majority of 51 votes would be required to advance legislation in the Senate. As vice president, Harris has expressed support for eliminating the filibuster. I cannot wait to cast the deciding vote to break the filibuster on voting rights and reproductive rights, she said in 2022. In 2019, then-Senator Harris said in her presidential

campaign that she would support abolishing the filibuster to pass climate change legislation like the Green New Deal. However, in 2017, Harris signed onto a letter written by Senators Susan Collins and Chris Coons urging the majority leader Mitch McConnell to preserve the filibuster. After Roe v. Wade was overturned, President Joe Biden said he would support a carve-out to the filibuster rules to allow for a vote on abortion rights legislation. But then Democratic Senators Joe Manchin from West Virginia and Kyrsten Sinema from Arizona opposed the move,

preventing it from proceeding. Former President Donald Trump also backed ending the filibuster when he was in office, suggesting that Republicans should do it before Democrats won back the Senate. Manchin and Sinema have both criticized Harris for her comments this week, and Manchin told CNN that he would not endorse Harris' candidacy over the remarks. Shame on her, Manchin said. She knows the filibuster is the holy grail of democracy.

It's the only thing that keeps us talking and working together. We previously covered efforts to eliminate the filibuster during Biden's term and published a deep dive on the issue in 2020. You can find links to those pieces in today's episode description. Today, we'll explore arguments about Harris's comments from the right and the left, and then Isaac's take. We'll be right back after this quick break. Working in the trades is intense. It can be stressful and painful. Some guys use drugs and alcohol to cope.

But when we ask for help, or we see someone struggling with addiction, our silence speaks volumes. See how you can help or get help at Canada.ca slash ease the burden. A message from the Government of Canada. From Searchlight Pictures comes A Real

Pain, one of the most moving and funny films of the year. Written and directed by Oscar-nominated Jesse Eisenberg and starring Eisenberg and Emmy Award winner Kieran Culkin, A Real Pain is a comedy about mismatched cousins who reunite for a tour through Poland to honor their beloved grandmother. The adventure takes a turn when the pair's old tensions resurface against the backdrop of their family history. A Real Pain was one of the buzziest titles at Sundance Film Festival this year, garnering rave reviews and acclaim from both critics and audiences alike. See A Real Pain only in theaters November 15th. Alright, first up, here's what the right is saying.

The right criticizes Harris's comments, suggesting her stance on the filibuster is dependent on whether her party is in power. Some say politicians on both sides should defend the filibuster on principle. Others suggest Harris's stance on the filibuster and the related abortion rights bill are extreme. In National Review, Charles C.W. Cook criticized Kamala Harris's fair weather filibuster stance. When Donald Trump was president and the Republicans ran both the Senate and the House, Harris signed a bipartisan letter that expressed her determination to preserve the ability of members to engage in extended debate when bills are on the Senate floor. When she joined this push, Harris's party was in control of neither the executive nor legislative branch, Cook wrote.

When, four years later, the Democrats won their own trifecta, two of those Democrats, Joe Manchin and Kyrsten Sinema, continued their support for the filibuster and proved that they, too, had acted on principle. But Kamala Harris? Kamala Harris did not. Leave aside for the moment that Harris was calling for a change in the rules based on nothing more honorable than that her party had temporarily won power, and that, in the process, she had moved from one branch of government to another, and consider instead what her call for a carve-out implied, Cook said. As a practical matter, to demand a carve-out for the 60-vote threshold is to request that the rules be suspended when you are inconvenienced by them, but imposed when you seek their protection. In the Hill, Brian Darling said, The filibuster is under attack yet again. No matter who takes the White House or the Senate, the filibuster should remain to allow for extended debate.

The procedure forces the majority party to listen to the minority party and to backbench members of its own party, Darling wrote. The filibuster is a procedure, not a policy. It serves as an important process to lengthen debate and to slow legislation in a way that forces the parties to compromise and come to agreement on controversial issues. The debate over the filibuster is coming up again because Democrats are confident that they can take the White House and secure a working majority on abortion issues in the state. Democrats think they can get to 51 votes on legislation to codify Roe, but they would fall short of the 60 votes needed to shut off debate, Darling said. That same position would be likely adopted by Republicans if former President Donald Trump wins and the GOP picks up enough Senate seats to give them a working pro-life majority, enabling them to move forward legislation limiting abortion. But controversial legislation should not be railroaded through Congress on party-line votes. In the Washington Examiner, Tiana Lodosher wrote, Harris still wants

to blow up the legislative filibuster because her values have not changed. The bill Harris is referring to, the Women's Health Protection Act, would not merely codify Roe and federally legalize an abortion through the point of fetal viability, now as low as 21 weeks of gestation. The WHPA, which she and Biden have backed, would federally legalize abortion through the end of pregnancy, Dosher said. and further federalize politics, but she's also doing so in a way a more radical Republican than Trump could reverse by accruing 50 votes to ban all abortions at any time in all 50 states. Politicians are indeed capable of evolving,

even doing so on occasion in a way that isn't purely cynical politicking. But as Harris provided any evidence of an authentic ideological journey that would inform her total reversal on criminalizing fracking or nationalizing the entire energy and healthcare industries, Docher wrote. When Trump jests he wants to be

a dictator for a day, the media would have us take him seriously. When Harris tells us she wants the federal government to encroach upon states' rights permanently and blow up a guardrail of democracy in the process, we must take her literally. All right, that's it for what the right is saying, which brings us to what the left is saying. The left says eliminating the filibuster is unlikely, but argues Harris's position has been consistent. Some suggest the filibuster is an undemocratic rule that should be removed. Others say Harris's comments were short-sighted. In New York Magazine, Ed Kilgore wrote about the odd backlash to Kamala Harris's support for filibuster reform. There's been a lot of media attention paid to Harris's reiteration

of her long-standing position and is certain to draw fire from Republicans as part of their defensive effort to label Democrats as the extremists on abortion, even though it's Donald Trump and his Supreme Court nominees who put the country in the position in the first place, Kilgore said. As long as Republicans are willing to re-pledge allegiance to the filibuster, which ironically Trump has long opposed, and forswear any carve-out of their own for legislation to ban abortion nationally, this could give them an argument to make, though it would probably still be prudent for them to change the subject to immigration or the economy. In a battle of 2025 hypotheticals, it's unclear how much of a chance Democrats would have to do what Harris has promised to try to do.

For one thing, the odds of Democrats hanging onto the Senate, even if they retain the White House, are low, Kilgore wrote. We'll know soon if Republicans decide to make this a presidential campaign issue or instead continue to follow Trump's lead in bobbing and weaving and lying and changing the subject when asked about abortion policy. But for all the talk of Kamala Harris changing policy positions, this is one on which she has been very consistent. In MSNBC, Zeeshan Aleem criticized Manchin's terrible reason

for not endorsing Harris. Manchin's announcement was peculiar in that Harris has called for modifying the filibuster in order to pass abortion rights and voting rights legislation for years. But on a more substantive level, Manchin's conception of the filibuster as the holy grail of democracy is, well, perplexing,

Aleem wrote. The bedrock principles of democracy are popular representation and majority rule. The filibuster, however, has effectively become a way for the minority party in the Senate to thwart simple majority rule. It is an idiosyncratic procedural tool designed to delay or block a vote on a bill. What makes the filibuster even worse is that it is used in a legislative body that already shuns the principle of popular representation and disenfranchises millions of Americans because it over-represents certain communities, people in small states and rural

areas, while essentially making the votes of people in more populated states and areas count less, Aleem wrote. The filibuster was not in the Constitution, and it was not some key part of the Founding Fathers's vision for America. One indicator that it wasn't deliberate is that the first live filibusters didn't take place until decades after the rule change that allowed them to even emerge as a legislative strategy. It was discovered as a way to block legislation by creative lawmakers. In the Washington Post, Ruth Marcus said, Harris is wrong about eliminating the filibuster for abortion rights.

Senate Democrats made a mistake when they eliminated the filibuster for lower court judges in 2013. They're making the same mistake again, except this time with a far less certain payoff, Marcus wrote. I would love to see a federal law that gives women nationwide the ability to decide for themselves whether to continue an unwanted or dangerous pregnancy. Harris's solution is, unfortunately, the wrong way to do it. This is not an easy call. The filibuster is an infuriating, undemocratic impediment to progress, except, that is, when it is a welcome guardrail against extremism.

But it takes self-restraint and an ability to see around corners, not to junk the filibuster when your party is in power, Marcus said. It would clear the way for Senate Democrats to enact all sorts of progressive legislation if they retain the majority, if they retake the House, and if they win the presidency. Great. But imagine the frightening things that could happen when the tables are turned and Republicans regain power. Gridlock looks a lot more attractive then.

All right, let's head over to Isaac for his take. It's hard to know where to start, but I'll say this. Harris reaffirming her position to abolish the filibuster is bad policy, and it's terrible politics. We did a deep dive on the filibuster back in 2020, before I had a team of editors, and if you haven't read it, it's still worth revisiting today. There's a link to it in today's episode description. Democrats have repeatedly tried to abolish the filibuster since then. While my views on a lot of issues change and evolve over time, my opinion on this one has only wobbled without really moving much. I've never bought the

argument that the filibuster produces more spirited debate, though there are some good examples of it doing that. But I do think it helps Congress move more deliberately and with more moderation, which I view as a good thing. I also believe it is an effective and useful check on one-party rule. Harris's position here is obviously self-defeating. On policy, it reads like an own goal. If she wants to abolish the filibuster to pursue the Women's Health Protection Act and she succeeds, that would mean the next Republican president with a majority in Congress could pass a federal ban on abortion access.

She'd open the door to a much worse situation than the pro-choice movement has right now, not to mention the measures Republicans could take up on other issues that progressives would abhor. Unless you are very confident Democrats can keep the White House for the next four to eight years at a time when they appear to be struggling to beat Donald Trump, then this is a very, very bad idea. Stumping on rolling back the filibuster is also politically toxic. It reminds everyone about a position Harris has

flip-flopped on and one that does not look like an authentic evolution, but political expediency. It helps Republicans label her as a radical who would blow up an old Senate rule to steamroll her agenda through Congress with a thin majority. She's promising to do it to pass a bill that legalizes late-term abortions, which Republicans will use as a cudgel to further cement her image as a radical. And on top of all of that, it provoked a promise not to endorse Harris from Senator Joe Manchin, the independent from West Virginia, who's one of the most recognizable politicians among the moderate conservative middle-aged white voters that Harris needs. Of course, her statement comes with caveats. Harris has openly wanted to get rid of the filibuster since 2019, so it's not as if this should come as a shock.

Trump, too, has been pushing to kill the filibuster since 2017, and Republicans expect him to lobby for its end if he is re-elected. So if respect for the filibuster is a key issue for you, that isn't a great reason to vote against Harris. I'm sure there are Democratic strategists who think her pushing for this will maximize the upside of the abortion issue. Perhaps promises to rid the Senate of this tradition will fire up the progressive base who wish Biden had gotten rid of it in 2021. One caveat that I don't think Harris

and her supporters can claim is her insistence that her plan is to pursue a carve-out only for abortion. But this isn't the same as removing the rule for judge confirmations. Ridding the filibuster for only certain types of legislation is not how this works. Once someone breaks the dam, it's over. And if you think this change might improve the Senate

as a deliberative body, just look at the House of Representatives. Simple majority rule and few incentives to work together has produced one of the most dysfunctional democratic bodies I can think of. This is a bad idea, and it's bad politics, and it's badly timed. idea, and it's bad politics, and it's badly timed. We'll be right back after this quick break.

Whether renting, renewing a mortgage, or considering buying a home, everybody has housing costs on their minds. For free tools and resources to help you manage your home finances, visit Canada.ca slash ItPaysToKnow. A message from the Government of Canada. From Searchlight Pictures comes A Real Pain, one of the most moving and funny films of the year. Written and directed by Oscar-nominated Jesse Eisenberg and starring Eisenberg and Emmy Award winner Kieran Culkin, A Real Pain is a comedy about mismatched cousins

who reunite for a tour through Poland to honor their beloved grandmother. The adventure takes a turn when the pair's old tensions resurface against the backdrop of their family history. A Real Pain was one of the buzziest titles at Sundance Film Festival this year, garnering rave reviews and acclaim from both critics and audiences alike. See A Real Pain only in theaters November 15th. Based on Charles Yu's award-winning book, Interior Chinatown follows the story of Willis Wu, a background character trapped in a police procedural

who dreams about a world beyond Chinatown. When he inadvertently becomes a witness to a crime, Willis begins to unravel a criminal web, his family's buried history, and what it feels like to be in the spotlight. Interior Chinatown is streaming November 19th, only on Disney+. All right, that is it for my take, which brings us to your questions answered. This one's from Blaze in San Luis Obispo, California.

I think I'm saying that right. Blaze asked, I've heard some mainstream conservatives talk about how if there's a Democrat president and Dem-dominated House and Senate, that they will try to add two new states, Puerto Rico and Washington, D.C., to add two new blue states. Is there any chance of this happening? new blue states. Is there any chance of this happening? Okay, so the short answer, I think, is no, there isn't a real chance of this happening. Not because some Democrats won't try, I think some will, but because they will need a much wider majority and then an entire party aligned on this issue, which I don't think they're close to having. There is a slim chance of Washington, D.C. being added if there is a Democratic president with a Democrat-controlled House and Senate and wide majorities in both chambers. The majority of Puerto Ricans favor statehood, as do an overwhelming majority of D.C. residents.

I do not think there's this much momentum behind Puerto Rican statehood, but D.C. statehood is a real possibility. And they've tried to make it happen before, fairly recently, actually. In 2021, the Democrat-controlled House passed H.R. 51 to make Washington, D.C. a state, sending the bill to the Senate. However, without the necessary 60 votes to overcome the filibuster, the measure never made it to the Senate floor.

In this election, where the House is a toss-up and Republicans are favored to gain control of the Senate, it's already unlikely that Democrats sweep the presidency in both chambers of Congress. And even if they did, I don't think there's any reason to expect that a bill for D.C. or Puerto Rico statehood would fare any better. All right, that is it for our reader question today. I'm going to send it back to John for the rest of the pod, and I'll see you guys on Sunday for the Sunday Pod with Ari. Have a good one. Peace. For the Sunday Pod with Ari, have a good one. Peace.

Thanks, Isaac. Here's your Under the Radar story for today, folks. This week, the Secret Service placed one of its agents on leave after he was accused of sexually assaulting a Harris campaign aide during a trip to plan security measures for a campaign event. According to a report from Real Clear Politics' Susan Crabtree, the agent committed the alleged assault after becoming intoxicated at dinner and returning to a hotel room with a group of Harris staffers. On Wednesday, the Secret Service confirmed that it had placed the agent on leave and was investigating the matter. The incident comes after a fraught time for the Secret Service, which has faced heightened scrutiny after two assassination attempts on former President Donald Trump in the last two months.

RealClearPolitics has this story, and there's a link in today's episode description. All right, next up is our numbers section. The length of the speech given by Senator Strom Thurmond, the Republican from South Carolina, in opposition of the Civil Rights Act of 1957, was 24 hours and 18 minutes, the longest individual filibuster in Senate history. The length in days of the longest multi-speaker filibuster in Senate history is 60, when Southern Democrats spoke in opposition to the Civil Rights Act of 1964. The number of filibusters recorded between the first known filibuster in 1837 and the creation of the cloture rule in 1917 is 40, according to an analysis by George Washington University's Sarah Binder and Arizona State University's Stephen Smith. The number of times cloture has been invoked since 1917 is 1,586. The number of times cloture has been invoked since 2009 is 1,249. The percentage of U.S. adults who said the filibuster should be ended in January 2022 is 35%, according to a poll from CBS News

YouGov. The percentage of U.S. adults who said the filibuster should be kept in January of 2022 is 34%. The percentage of Democrats who said they opposed the Senate's current filibuster rule in June of 2022 is 56%, according to a YouGov poll. And the percentage of Republicans who said they opposed the Senate's current filibuster rule in June of 2022 is 23%. All right, and last but not least, our Have a Nice Day story.

Papua New Guinea, an island nation in the Pacific, has experienced an increased level of ethnic violence and worker exploitation by international companies. While on tour in Southeast Asia and Oceania earlier this month, Pope Francis traveled to Vanimo, Papua New Guinea, a remote area that lacks running water and has little electricity. The Pope brought medicines, clothing, toys, and musical instruments with him as gifts to the residents of Animo, while urging local leaders to improve the treatment of workers and address the recent spate of violence.

We must put an end to the destructive behaviors such as violence, infidelity, exploitation, alcohol, and drug abuse, evils which imprison and take away the happiness of so many of our brothers and sisters, Pope Francis said. Reuters has this story, and there's a link in today's episode description. All right, everybody, that is it for today's episode. As always, if you'd like to support our work, please go to readtangle.com and sign up for a membership.

Isaac and Ari will be back with the Sunday pod, and I will return on Monday. For the rest of the crew, this is John Law signing off. Have a fantastic weekend, y'all. Peace. Our podcast is written by me, Isaac Saul, and edited and engineered by Duke Thomas. Our script is edited by Ari Weitzman, Will Kabak, Daily Saul, and Sean Brady. The logo for our podcast was made by Magdalena Bokova, who is also our social media manager.

The music for the podcast was produced by Diet 75. And if you're looking for more from Tangle, please go check out our website at readtangle.com. That's readtangle.com.