“I would be surprised if there was anyone in any of these [competitive] states … that would support maintaining the obstruction, “said Pennsylvania Democratic Governor John Fetterman, who is seeking his party’s nomination for a Senate seat next year. “Getting rid of the obstruction is the closest to a litmus test for our party that I can describe.”
It is basically impossible for Democrats in 2022 to get 10 seats and secure an obstruction-proof majority, given the Senate’s current 50-50 split and its limited number of resumption opportunities across the country. But getting vacant seats in Pennsylvania, Wisconsin or North Carolina next fall while staying elsewhere is a plausible way for Democrats to crush legislative obstruction in 2023, as long as they also have a majority in the House.
Fetterman and state deputy Malcolm Kenyatta, the first official candidates in what is likely to be a primary cluster in Pennsylvania, support the abolition of the obstruction. Among North Carolina’s Democratic Senate candidates, former Senator Erica Smith supports the abolition of obstruction, while state senator Jeff Jackson referred to himself in an interview as an “obstructionist-skeptic”.
Both candidates announced to the Senate in Wisconsin, Milwaukee Bucks executive Alex Lasry and Outagamie county executive Tom Nelson are competing on an anti-obstruction platform. Lasry said it is a “relic of the past”.
“I’m going to make this a problem [in the primary] and I will make it a general problem for the Republican candidate, whether Ron Johnson or someone else, to defend him. There is absolutely no defense, ”said Nelson.
Democratic candidates running against the obstruction see their position as a no-brainer, because the need to win 60 votes is preventing the party from achieving long-standing goals that are objectively more achievable with a simple majority ruling the day in the Senate.
But framing the issue also gives Republicans a potent weapon next fall. They may argue that, in the middle of their term, even a single seat in the Senate can make the difference between a historic change in the structure of the United States government and a system in which the minority party still has the power to prevent legislation that it considers questionable. .
Chris Hartline, a spokesman for the National Republican Senatorial Committee, said Democrats are campaigning to “eliminate obstruction so they can pass the most radical legislative agenda in history.”
“The Democratic agenda that they could stick to at 51 is an agenda that is far outside the mainstream, where the majority of Americans are,” said Senate minority president John Thune (RS.D.). “I really think it would resonate with voters.”
Still, Democrats do not see the downside of their position. Asked about the Republican Party’s efforts to control Democrats and as protectors of obstruction, Fetterman replied: “promise?”
While Sinema and Manchin said they cannot be influenced by the obstruction, it is also technically possible that they will change their mind if Senate minority leader Mitch McConnell builds an opposition wall for the next 20 months. Even if Democrats got rid of the 60-vote requirement unilaterally through the “nuclear option”, intermediate votes would still be a referendum on the wisdom of changing Senate rules to pass party legislation.
Even with the odds stacked against them in a 50-50 Senate, the “battle for obstruction is now,” said Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.). “Major central democratic issues, such as access to voting, corruption, arms security, climate change – we cannot resolve these things unless we use the majority vote.”
Candidates said the problem is already arising on the trail. Voters are “hostile” to obstruction, Jackson said. He did not openly endorse the elimination of the 60-vote limit, but said that it should not be an obstacle to passing legislation on voting rights.
“If we allow the obstruction to remove high priority items, such as civil rights legislation, it will be a major obstacle for 2022,” said Jackson.
The first primaries are still a year away, and the Democratic primaries will be more crowded. But the early candidates’ anti-obstruction stance cements previously obscure Senate rules as a central issue for primary voters.
And running in a Democratic primary camp without opposing obstruction can be difficult.
“Democrats should be in favor of doing shit for people. And if someone is still talking about how much they love obstruction, then I want to hear your argument for how we do things for people, ”said Kenyatta.
Democrats’ big goals often clash with the simple mathematical problem posed by the obstructionist. The New Deal Green and Medicare for All dominated the party’s presidential primaries last year. However, even after the Democrats came up with a sweep of Washington, they are with few votes in the Senate to approve even relatively modest immigration projects.
“I think this is where a lot of the frustration of voters is. Democrats are saying, ‘Hey, let’s do all these things,’ ”said Lasry. “We have managed the three branches of government and we cannot do anything because of this supermajority rule that the Constitution does not even have”.
The issue may be more resonant in Democratic primaries than in general elections in some undecided states. Congresswoman Stephanie Murphy (D-Florida), who is exploring a challenge for Republican Senator Marco Rubio, declined to comment and said obstruction was a Senate affair.
But the two Senate Democrats in next year’s toughest reelection contests are, notably, entertaining efforts to change the obstruction.
Senator Mark Kelly (D-Ariz.) Said he would weigh any changes to the Senate rules against “how does this affect my voters in Arizona, and is it good for our country or not?”
Senator Raphael Warnock (D-Ga.) Put it this way: “I am really focused on approving these voting rights projects. We have to overcome them, whether we get rid of the obstruction or not. “
The obstruction talk captivated the Senate for weeks, a fixation that will only increase if Senate majority leader Chuck Schumer presents bills passed by the House on weapons, immigration, voting rights and LGBTQ protections just to see them sunk. for lack of 60 votes. The resulting focus on obstruction will only make the issue more politically resonant.
Steven Law, the president of the Senate Leadership Fund, a super PAC aligned with McConnell, said he expects to see paid advertising on the subject next year, regardless of what happens to the obstruction in this Congress.
“Every day the news is full of discussions about the Democrats getting rid of the obstruction and talking about what they could go through if they could do that, it just makes the issue that much stronger in this next cycle,” said Law. Democratic political practice to think about giving up obstruction when they have a 50-50 Senate. ”
Olivia Beavers contributed to this report.