The Daily - Joe Manchin’s Motivations

Episode Date: June 2, 2021

Representing a vanishing brand of Democratic politics that makes his vote anything but predictable, Senator Joe Manchin of West Virginia has become the make-or-break legislator of the Biden era.We explore how and why Mr. Manchin’s vote has become so powerful.Guest: Jonathan Martin, a national political correspondent for The New York Times. Sign up here to get The Daily in your inbox each morning. And for an exclusive look at how the biggest stories on our show come together, subscribe to our newsletter. Background reading: In Washington, policy revolves around Joe Manchin. Read Jonathan Martin’s exploration of why the senator likes it that way. For more information on today’s episode, visit nytimes.com/thedaily. Transcripts of each episode will be made available by the next workday.

With the 50-50 split in the Senate, all eyes are turning to moderate Senator Joe Manchin of West Virginia. All eyes on Joe Manchin once again when it comes to the next nomination. From the New York Times, I'm Michael Barbaro. This is The Daily. Democrats don't even have all 50 members on board. There's that one outstanding conservative moderate senator, Joe Manchin of West Virginia. From the moment Joe Biden was elected president, much of his attention has been focused on winning over a single lawmaker from within his own party. Joe Manchin is literally the only standing living Democrat

left in West Virginia. He is in a state that Donald Trump won 68 percent to 29 percent. Senator Joe Manchin of West Virginia. Joe Manchin has been very clear that he is not budging on the filibuster. Joe Manchin is throwing a wrench into President Biden's infrastructure plan. Whose vote has become indispensable. On voting rights, on guns, Joe Manchin is seen as a Democratic obstacle toward the White House getting their agenda through. And whose personal views can make or break Biden's legislative agenda. Joe Manchin is the most important person in this conversation today. Arguably the most powerful senator in the whole Capitol building.

Joe Manchin is the most important man in the world. I spoke with my colleague, Jonathan Martin, about what motivates the most powerful legislator in Washington. The question is, what does Joe Manchin want exactly? It's Wednesday, June 2nd. Jonathan, we have been wanting to have this conversation with you for a long time, because pretty much from the day Joe Biden was sworn as president, we've kept hearing that a single member of Congress, Senator Joe Manchin,

has become the make-or-break legislator of the Biden era, which is a kind of a hard concept to wrap your head around. So this is the nature of only having 50 seats in the Senate. It empowers single senators and gives that one senator outsized control of the agenda of his party. Because keep in mind, for the most part, you have to have 60 votes in the Senate to get anything done. But you can do some budget-related bills on a straight majority with just 50 votes. Right, bills like infrastructure, stimulus. Exactly. And so because of that,

on a handful of big-ticket budget-related items, Manchin himself is the key vote and can be the decider. And Manchin is the key vote because he's the one who keeps the Democratic Party guessing about exactly which way he's going to vote. He's not exactly a shoo-in for the Democratic side. Right. And why is Manchin, of all people, the frequent holdout? Well, when you ask Manchin that question, what he says is that bipartisanship is very important to

him. It's vitally important to him. In order to restore civility of the United States Senate and our political discourse, we must pledge to return an era of bipartisan cooperation and agreement. We might disagree, but we can work through this and remember what our purpose of being here.

The people want us to succeed. They depend on us to succeed. And that's the policies that they need. But in order to understand how he thinks about that, you have to see him as an alchemy of his state, of a older version of his political party, and the Senate mentor that he has tried to echo. I would just start with his state. What he's growing up, West Virginia, it was a very democratic state, but culturally it was always on the right because of its sort of rural nature. And this is somebody

who grew up in a fairly small town in northern West Virginia, Italian family, a Catholic family, somebody whose parents and relatives were involved in local and state politics. And he grew up in politics at a time where being a Democrat was not terribly different to being raised Catholic. It was just in his DNA. It was part of his identity. And there is this seminal 1960 Democratic primary. I want to pledge again tonight that I will not forget the people of West Virginia. Between JFK and Hubert Humphrey in the state. I said that if elected president, I would immediately inaugurate a program of assistance to West Virginia. This I intend to do. And this is a primary that has gone down in the annals of history because

West Virginia, as you know, has less members of my faith than any state in the United States It demonstrated for the first time that a Catholic candidate for president could win in a heavily Protestant state And I think that I wouldn't have come in West Virginia unless I felt that the people of West Virginia believe in the Constitution Article 1, which provides for the people of West Virginia believe in the Constitution, Article I, which provides for the separation of church and state. And for Manchin, it was formative. He can recall, you know, Bobby Kennedy, Ted Kennedy being in his parents' kitchen. And if you go to Manchin's office in Washington, you walk into the lobby, he's got a framed picture of JFK. So those are his roots and the Kennedy influence on he and his family that I think goes to the heart of his identity as somebody who was a Catholic at a time when there were more of a sort of persecuted minority in this country. And so how does that play out as he enters into politics as a career?

how does that play out as he enters into politics as a career? So it's in his DNA. It's part of his identity as a sort of cradle Democrat, if you will. But by 2000, West Virginia, the state that has always been a Democratic bulwark, state and national elections, has become competitive at the national level. And that's made clear when Gore himself, a Tennessee Democrat, cannot hold the state in 2000, and George W. Bush carries the state. The first time in decades that a Republican had won the state. And so Manchin sees this, and he knows he's got to navigate a changing state politically and has to clearly brand himself as a different kind of Democrat. I'm Joe Manchin. I'm running for governor and asking for your vote and support so that we can get West Virginia working again. So when he runs for governor in 2004, he creates this Joe Manchin, West Virginia Democratic branding. creates this Joe Manchin, West Virginia Democratic branding.

I make you two promises. Two promises as your governor. Every day that I wake up, I'll be working to save a good job in West Virginia. And every night before I go to bed, we'll be saving and fighting to save another good job or create another good job. And that branding is, I'm going to be a dependable vote for economic aid for this state, for the safety net, for the kind of New Deal, Great Society type programs that are popular in a really poor state. But I'm not going to be culturally to the left in a way that's going to alienate very kind of traditional voters in my state

who may like their social security, but they also don't want to have their rights to guns infringed upon, who are anti-abortion rights, who work in or around the coal industry. So they're perhaps sort of wary of environmental regulations. I think that's the message that he's trying to convey with that branding. And of course, he wins. Yes. And once Manchin becomes governor, like every governor for decades in that state, he develops a relationship with the distinguished, the legendary Robert C. Byrd. The legendary senior senator, Robert C. Byrd. Clio being my favorite muse. Let me begin this evening with a look backward over the well-traveled road of history.

Byrd, who, of course, the long-serving Democrat who, in his youth, was actually in the Klan and was an ardent segregationist at the start of his congressional career, eventually became sort of the patriarch of this state and the self-appointed historian of the U.S. Senate. Let us also remember that even after 200 years, the Senate is still the anchor of the republic. And they get to know each other. And clearly, Byrd wants to explain to this younger up-and-coming Democrat how politics works, and especially how the beloved Senate that Byrd served in for so many years works. The Senate has always been blessed with senators who were able to rise above party and consider first and foremost the national interest.

And so Byrd is sort of inculcating Manchin, even when he is governor, with this, some would say, rose-tinted version of what the Senate is and how it operates. Political polarization, too much emphasis on which side of the aisle one sits, is not now and has never been a good thing for the Senate. And how it moves legislation in a bipartisan fashion, how it respects the rights of the political minority, how it gives individual senators an outsized

role. In war and at peace, it has been the sure refuge and protector of the rights of the states and of a political minority, because great and courageous senators have always been there to stay the course and keep the faith. I spoke to Manchin at some length a few months ago about his role in the Senate, and even without prompting, Mikey, he cites Senator Byrd. He recalls Byrd telling him that the founding fathers created the Senate in this fashion. The phrase he used was basically,

so the big guy didn't beat up the little guy. There he's talking about the majority in the Senate respecting the rights of the minority party. He also told me, Burr told him, yeah, it's hard, but it's supposed to be hard. And the reason why it's supposed to be hard is that that prods the two parties towards bipartisanship. So Manchin learns of the Senate from Byrd's perspective of the Senate. That is his grounding in this chamber. And Byrd passes away in 2010. and then when there's a special election for the Byrd seat, Manchin himself runs for the seat. And he comes to Washington fully having internalized what he has learned from Byrd, who was widely seen as the protector of Senate traditions. of Senate predictions. So, Jonathan, Joe Manchin arrives in the U.S. Senate from day one carrying several seemingly very important pieces of identity. He's a Catholic Democrat like JFK. He's representing a very culturally conservative state. And he's taking a seat from his mentor,

who has just schooled him about the importance of bipartisanship and civility and reaching across the aisle. But I'm aware that at the time he's coming to the Senate, the Senate is changing, right? It's starting to become less like the Senate that Byrd spoke about and worked in. It's becoming more partisan, a place where things are just absolutely happening in party line, partisan ways, constantly. Yes, he is coming to the Senate that is increasingly reflecting the Senate of today, not the Senate of Byrd's era. In fact, he comes in right at a sort of inflection point in 2010, where you're seeing a lot of the old guard senators retire or die. So this is a moment where a lot of these giants of the Senate, who were themselves

devoted to the old ways of the Senate, bipartisanship, at times even not campaigning against some of their colleagues, because they were friends, even though they were in the other party. This period is coming to an end, and Manchin is entering a very different, much more ideologically charged chamber. 2012, 2014, 2016, you know, every two years, the Senate is getting much more purified, more polarized. There's fewer moderate to conservative Democrats, in large part because the South is becoming much more heavily Republican in a way that it was not when he arrived. So, you know, by the time that we're now getting to the Trump era, Manchin is increasingly an outlier in this more polarized body. So Joe Manchin quickly becomes a political anachronism in the Senate. Yes. He is oftentimes a party of one and his votes are anything but predictable. We'll be right back.

We'll be right back. Jonathan, you said that Manchin's unique brand of West Virginia Democratic politics is unpredictable. What do you mean by that? Well, some of his votes are along party lines. There's no question. But he is showing a willingness to compromise and be quite unpredictable about what he will and will not support. So, for example, on a number of issues, he tends to be more supportive of the conservative line on cultural issues, whether that's opposing abortion rights, generally supporting the coal industry, which is key to his state, largely supportive of gun rights, although with some

willingness to compromise. And then, of course, he memorably voted to confirm Justice Brett Kavanaugh, which angered a lot of Democrats. And, you know, I think just generally his desire for bipartisanship and almost fixation on bipartisanship and consensus has angered a Democratic Party that is just not as invested in that process as he is, because what they would say is, we don't have interlocutors. We don't have good faith counterparts who want the same end goals that we want, or who are not good negotiators in the way that Manchin believes they are. So he can cause great frustration to his party on process and on policy.

But what Republicans will tell you, and oftentimes roll in their eyes when they hear the critique of Manchin from the left is, yeah, Manchin's great, but he's not there when you need him. For them. Right. And some of the signal legislative measures that have come before the Senate in recent years, Manchin has taken the party line. You look at the two perhaps seminal issues legislatively of the Trump era, the tax cuts of 2017 and the attempt to repeal the Affordable Care Act also in 2017. In both cases, Manchin sided critically with Democrats. So, Jonathan, I think that brings us up to now and to Manchin starting to play this crucial, some would say confounding, make-or-break role in the Senate

for a Democratic president. And it feels like the first time that happened was during President Biden's attempt to pass a major stimulus bill. Right. And this is where you really see me engine flexing his muscles. Well, it is not just Republicans that have been roadblocks to progressive priorities in this bill, but moderates in their own party. It could depend on this senator, Democrat Joe Manchin of West Virginia. Now, Joe Manchin, he is at the center of attention on this. So what exactly was his objection to the stimulus bill? What was holding the bill up specifically that Joe Manchin wanted?

Two levels. Joe Manchin's position seems to be that bipartisanship is a requirement for his vote. The first and the most intimidating one for him is he wants it to seem more moderate, okay? We've got to try to find some consensus. Why can't we work with the Republicans on this? Let's make it seem more moderate, centrist. Centrist Democrat Joe Manchin insisted on narrowing some provisions to win his vote. And what this crystallizes is the power that West Virginia Senator Joe Manchin has over this process. And I think less important, but what ultimately was the concern was the size of the

unemployment benefit. He wanted those unemployment benefits down from 400 to 300. How much was it going to be? How long was it going to last? How this all ends is still very much up for debate. But the reality is this. Democrats cannot pass this bill without Senator Joe Manchin. And he made this painful for a set of Democrats and made them sweat and created some real drama. Do Democrats have the votes, including Manchin, to get this through? The Friday before the weekend when the bill cleared the Senate was a very stressful day for Chuck Schumer and Joe Biden because they had to get him on the phone, you know, try to sort of get him to a place where he could get to yes on the final version of the bill. Joe Manchin, one of the most powerful people in Washington, D.C. right now. And they trimmed the unemployment benefit in the final version of the bill, not enormously, but they did to placate him.

And now it won't add another four hundred dollars per enormously, but they did to placate him. Now, it won't add another $400 per person, but $300. As in past episodes, when the roll was called, he took the Democratic line and he voted for the bill. It took longer than expected, but Democrats did what they set out to do, and they did it without a single Republican vote. And if it wasn't for his vote, there would not have been any $1.9 trillion WS bill. Manchin seems to be very much enjoying his role as basically a one-man Senate. And here's what's fascinating about that whole episode.

I think the unemployment benefit issue was something that he seized upon, largely with the idea of making the bill seem more moderate and seem like they had negotiated something with the Republicans. I'm not sure that it was a personal do or die issue for him, but it was something that he saw as a way to make this seemingly a negotiated, more bipartisan bill. Huh. So in some ways, he wakes up in the morning and says, I'm worried that a piece of legislation, stimulus, for example, is too partisan or looks too partisan.

And so he then will go find, potentially, something to seize on to try to make a little less partisan. That's the approach. Yeah, I think that really captures him. And I think if you ask, you know, other senators, they'd probably echo a version of that, that in a lot of cases, the substance of these bills, he's not super, you know, connected to. It's more just the appearance of the bills. Yeah. Is it possible that bipartisanship to Manchin is ultimately a

kind of political cover? And what it really means is I need to buck my party a bunch of the time to not seem liberal, and I need to make sure my positions once in a while drift towards the Republican side, given the political makeup of my state. And Manchin calls this recurring tactic of his bipartisanship, which sounds high-minded rather than tactical, but it really is tactical. I think it's both and. I think there's no question that he recognizes the political benefit in a conservative state of being seen as somebody who's more willing to buck his party line. But I think it's also true to who he is. And I think he also is somebody who

is more of a political centrist and has been for a long time. So how is that dynamic playing out right now with the infrastructure bill, this Joe Manchin effect on this hugely important piece of legislation to President Biden? Well, this is part of the reason why you're seeing Biden meet with the Republicans trying to reach a bipartisan negotiated bill because he's got to convince Joe Manchin that he made an effort. He's got to get caught trying. I love that phrase, get caught trying to be bipartisan, even if the Republican votes may not actually be there. Exactly. Because Manchin wants to see the effort made. He wants to see every attempt to craft a

bipartisan bill. So the fact that these negotiations are even happening right now, the fact that Republicans from the Senate are sitting with President Biden and their Democratic Senate counterparts and debating this and trying to reach a deal, even if there's not much of a chance of Republicans actually voting for this bill, that to Joe Manchin is the thing. That's exactly what Robert Byrd told him needs to happen. So is that enough for Manchin, what he's seen so far? Well, I think he would like to see it reach a consensus, obviously. But yes. And this is, by the way, kind of where he differs with Byrd. You know, Byrd, in a lot of ways, was a protector of the Senate. But Byrd also wanted to take care of West Virginia and pave a lot of roads out there with Uncle Sam's dollars, and he did that. With Manchin, it's not like Biden could call him up and say, Joe, if we do five more million dollars for West Virginia

broadband or bridges and roads, can that get you to yes? If it was that easy, they wouldn't have had to sweat so much. Manchin is not going to be somebody who's just easily bought off with more pork for the state. The frustration is that that kind of a politician is a little bit more operational for negotiators. Right. The Joe Manchin effect in many ways feels like profound inefficiency. A lot of singing and dancing and theater that may result in nothing but a lot of wasted time, potentially. He would say, and his mentor Robert Byrd would say, that's the nature of the Senate. That's how it works. Jonathan, this is all helping me understand why Senator Joe Manchin would be reluctant to do something else that many of his Democratic colleagues are demanding that the party do, which is support ending the filibuster rule, which requires 60 votes to get anything done in the Senate and move to a system where a simple majority would carry the day.

And based on our conversation, it's clear that doing that would violate the traditions of the Senate to someone like Manchin. It would mean one party doesn't even have to bother, which is a slower and, yes, more inefficient body compared to the House that demands bipartisan compromise and negotiation. Now, a lot of Democrats believe that basically the filibuster has become simply a stalling tactic now and a way to sort of torpedo the majority party's actual agenda rather than a device for compromise. But Manchin is a holdout, and he is trying to use the filibuster so that it can work to sort of foster bipartisanship. And we'll see how that goes on the infrastructure bill. We'll see if they can get a deal across party lines. But in the meantime, because Manchin will not relent on the filibuster, and because a handful of his colleagues in the Senate Democratic ranks won't relent, a number of bills that have passed the House have been held up. Right. Whether it's on issues like guns or labor rights because of the filibuster. A lot of that legislation is still sitting at the Senate door.

legislation is still sitting at the Senate door. And what does Joe Manchin say to that, Jonathan, that chasing bipartisanship in an era where it's pretty much impossible, I guess a charitable way of saying it would be elusive, what does he say to the reality that that means that all of those proposals you just mentioned remain stuck? How does he answer that? I think he is very content trying to make the Senate work again. And I don't think it bothers him that much that his preference is to try to make the place function. I think he's heard the arguments. I think he gets it a lot, not just from voters, but from obviously from some of his own colleagues who are more progressive than he is, who have expressed their frustration to him. I just don't think it dislodges him for all the reasons that we talked about earlier, because the nature of his state and his background is such that there's just not much political leverage that folks have on the left that can get him to move. You know, memorably, when I talked to him

a few months ago, he said, what are they going to do? Come to my state and campaign against me? Please, please. The best thing that would happen to me out there. What does he mean by that? It would just prove his independence, that he's not a party line Democrat. It would help him politically out there. And, you know, I think his memorable retort to me was, would they rather not have me at all? Which is his way of saying, well, would you rather have a, at times, maddening, at times, confounding, at times, rewarding Democratic vote in the breach? Or would you rather have a conventional Trump Republican in this heavily

red pro-Trump state who has won more vote to make Mitch McConnell the majority? And I think that's ultimately where somebody like Schumer and a lot of Democrats in the Senate have calmed down is, yes, Manchin can drive them crazy for a number of different reasons. But ultimately, Manchin can drive them crazy for a number of different reasons. But ultimately, the alternative to Manchin is not a more progressive Democratic senator in West Virginia. The alternative to Manchin, if we're being honest, is a pro-Trump, pro-Mitch McConnell for majority leader Senate in West Virginia that because of the divide right now would deny Democrats from having a majority in the Senate. Jonathan, does Senator Joe Manchin have a breaking point in his approach to bipartisanship? We saw this weekend that the Senate voted not to create an independent commission to investigate what happened on January 6th. Republicans used the tactics at their disposal to prevent the Senate from getting to 60

votes, thereby blocking the commission. And Manchin came out. The failed vote in the Senate had six brave Republicans, but that was four short of the 10 necessary to advance the legislation. And seemed very upset about this. Choosing to put politics and political election above the health of our democracy is unconscionable. And the betrayal of the oath that we each take is something they will have to live with. In a way, I don't think I've ever seen him be upset about something. And I am sorry that my Republican colleagues and friends

let political fear prevent them from doing what they know in their hearts to be right. And it made me wonder, are there votes and issues where having seen that the bipartisanship he says he stands for is not happening and that maybe the other side isn't even negotiating in good faith,

where he says enough is enough? Well, I think he wants to see if these infrastructure negotiations do result in a compromise and see how they ultimately go, because that could answer your question as to whether or not they were done in good faith. But you raise an important point, because the January 6th commission vote goes to the heart of the institution of the Congress and whether or not the institution can function. And that, as we've talked about, is what Manchin is

most passionate about, more than any policy issue. And I think it was very disheartening for him to see that January 6th commission vote filibustered. And I think it raises doubts with him about the institution functioning. But I don't think he's willing yet to simply say, that's it, we got to give up. I'm trying to find bipartisan consensus. I think he's going to keep trying to do that. It's going to irritate progressives. It's going to irritate even some moderate Democrats. But he's not going to stop being Joe Manchin, at least not anytime soon. Well, Jonathan, thank you very much. We appreciate it.

Thank you. We'll be right back. Here's what else you need to know today. The events we speak of today took place 100 years ago. And yet, I'm the first president in 100 years ever to come to Tulsa. In a speech on Tuesday, President Biden vowed that the destruction of a vibrant Black community in Tulsa, Oklahoma, carried out by a murderous white mob on June 1st, 1921, would be forgotten no longer. We do ourselves no favors by pretending none of this ever happened.

Or it doesn't impact us today because it does still impact us today. We do ourselves no favors by pretending none of this ever happened. Or it doesn't impact us today because it does still impact us today. Biden said that it was time for the United States to reckon with the racism and bigotry in American life and to call the ugliest moments in the country's history exactly what they are, rather than rely on euphemisms, as white leaders in Tulsa did for decades. My fellow Americans, this was not a riot. This was a massacre. Today's episode was produced by Eric Krupke and Stella Tan. It was edited by Paige Cowett and Dave Shaw and engineered by Chris Wood.

That's it for The Daily. I'm Michael Barbaro. See you tomorrow.