The disconnect between Biden's rhetoric and his actions on voting rights that many are pointing out is real. If this is an enormous threat to democracy, why won't he support changing the filibuster over it?

Only seems to be two possible answers... (cont'd)
Possibility #1: Biden and his aides don't fully buy the claims about the imminent threat to democracy or the importance of the For the People Act. There have been signals from the White House that this is part of the story.

theatlantic.com/politics/archi…
Possibility #2: Biden simply sees no path to success on passing democracy reform legislation through Congress, and prefers to focus on what can pass. And he needs Manchin and Sinema for, well, anything else, ruling out tough tactics against them

vox.com/2021/6/22/2254…
It's probably a combination of these, with some nostalgia about the Senate sprinkled on top.

But he and the WH are unwilling to say either outright, and instead purport to take the threat super-seriously and claim they're still fighting to pass the bill. Hence the disconnect
Option #3 being offered in replies: Biden secretly wants further filibuster reform but thinks publicly saying so will backfire and make Manchin and Sinema less likely to do it.

I guess not impossible, but that didn't stop him from saying he supported talking filibuster change
This is also why I don't buy the "there's a secret plan" take. The WH's top priorities right now are infrastucture bill + reconciliation bill and that is extremely clear if you look at their intense engagement on that issue.

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Andrew Prokop

Andrew Prokop Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @awprokop

14 Jul
Schumer re: budget resolution deal: "Every major program that Pres. Biden has asked us for is funded in a robust way, and in addition we are making some additions to that," most notably Medicare expansion to cover dental / vision / hearing
This reconciliation bill would apparently cover:
1. Tax credits for families
2. Paid leave
3. Child care subsidies
4. Universal pre-K
5. Free community college
6. Clean energy
7. Housing
8. Long-term care
9. Medicare dental/vision/hearing
10. Medicare drug prices
& more...
But, of course, in the end Manchin and Sinema's votes (and all other 48 Senate dems, and a House majority) will be needed to pass it. So still quite a ways from the finish line
Read 4 tweets
7 Jul
Once Maya Wiley was eliminated, 73,979 of her voters' ballots were exhausted (because they ranked neither Adams nor Garcia).

Adams's margin of victory is 8,426 votes in the current count.
That was about a third of Wiley voters (in the three-way matchup round) who then ended up with exhausted ballots.

The rest broke strongly for Garcia (129,446 to Garcia, and 49,669 to Adams)
If the outcome was ultimately determined by a lack of voter understanding of the system, that wouldn’t be ideal.

But of course, it’s only because of ranked choice that Garcia was in contention at all.

vox.com/22565095/ranke…
Read 4 tweets
27 Jun
In thinking about what specific revisions to the Electoral Count Act are necessary, I think it's important not just to look backward at 2020, but to consider how a future crisis may be somewhat different (mini-thread)
The ECA can come into play in three scenarios:
1.) A disputed state outcome (two slates of electors) can be settled by Congress
2.) A state acting corruptly can have its EVs thrown out by Congress
3.) Legitimate state results can be corruptly thrown out by Congress
In 2020 all the states ended up submitting legitimate results. So the problem that manifested on January 6 was #3 — a corrupt attempt by a congressional faction to throw out legitimate results.
Read 4 tweets
9 Jun
In April he told me: “I’ve never considered it from that standpoint because I know I can change more from where I’m at. And I still believe in the principles of the Democratic Party that I grew up with.” vox.com/22339531/manch…
The spectre of a party-switch hangs because it brought a quick end to the last 50-50 Senate. Many reasons to doubt Manchin would do it. Of course if, say, Biden and Schumer went to war against him like some progressives want, might be a different story.

vox.com/22339531/manch…
That's basically what Manchin said to me. Then again that was also true for Jim Jeffords, who did it in 2001. Jeffords acted mainly out of personal pique.

Read 4 tweets
8 Jun
There’s been a lot of conflation of separate issues into “the Republican Party’s threat to democracy,” which is effective rhetorically but can confuse things from the “what to do about it” perspective

vox.com/2021/6/8/22521…
I'd frame it as three threats that get the most attention:

(1) Voter suppression / voter access
(2) Structural biases (gerrymandering, Senate and Electoral College skew)
(3) Actually overturning results

But these are distinct problems that would have distinct solutions
The For the People Act does the most on #1, voter access.

It tackles a limited part of #2 — just House gerrymandering (and there are different views on how effective its proposals would be).

It does little of consequence on #3 (overturning results)

vox.com/2021/6/8/22521…
Read 5 tweets
7 Jun
Schumer's plan was to vote on S.1 at the end of the month. Activists had hoped to use it to make the case for filibuster reform.

Manchin has cut that off at the knees, making clear the bill won't even get 50. And focus on bipartisanship means changes to substance won't sway him
See for instance this @sambrodey piece from just a few days ago. This was how activists hoped the drama would play out (a bit of magical thinking here), but Manchin has since made clear it's not happening.

thedailybeast.com/why-democrats-…
As I explored in my profile there are two Manchins, depending on the issue. There's one who will play hardball but cut a deal in the end. And there's another who will put his foot down, and keep it down.

vox.com/22339531/manch…
Read 4 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!

:(