A Post-Nuclear Senate Would Be a Wasteland

Limiting the minority’s power to filibuster might ease a nominee’s path, but it won’t end dysfunction. It will make it worse.

National Journal
Patrick Reis
Add to Briefcase
See more stories about...
Patrick Reis
Nov. 7, 2013, midnight

It’s 2015 and the Sen­ate has gone to hell.

Hav­ing freed him­self from the fili­buster by det­on­at­ing the “nuc­le­ar op­tion,” Sen­ate Ma­jor­ity Over­lord Harry Re­id stalks the halls of the Cap­it­ol, passing bills at whim and smit­ing col­leagues at will. Mitch Mc­Con­nell has gone in­to hid­ing, while his fel­low Re­pub­lic­ans wage a guer­illa res­ist­ance and dream of tak­ing the cham­ber — and tak­ing re­venge. On the brink of ex­tinc­tion, the cham­ber’s fi­nal few mod­er­ates cower in the base­ment, sport­ing fin­ger­less gloves and burn­ing his­tor­ic­al doc­u­ments for warmth as they listen to Jay Rock­e­feller and Lamar Al­ex­an­der tell tales of glory days gone by.

OK, so that’s all non­sense. The “nuc­le­ar op­tion” — a pro­pos­al to change Sen­ate rules to dis­al­low fili­busters on ex­ec­ut­ive nom­in­ees but still leave the op­tion open in all oth­er cases — would not send Con­gress spiral­ing in­to dysto­pia, but that doesn’t mean it’s a good idea.

Uto­pi­an fantas­ies aside, par­ing back the fili­buster would do real harm, trad­ing one brand of Sen­ate dys­func­tion for a deep­er one and fur­ther widen­ing the coun­try’s already-yawn­ing par­tis­an chasm in the pro­cess.

Boiled down, the pro-nuc­le­ar caucus’ ar­gu­ment amounts to: elim­in­at­ing the fili­buster for ex­ec­ut­ive branch nom­in­ees will pro­tect the pres­id­ent’s right to pick his ad­min­is­tra­tion, give gov­ern­ment agen­cies more sta­bil­ity, and skip lo­g­jams that leave the Sen­ate with less time to le­gis­late.

But all of that as­sumes that the minor­ity, fresh off a “nuc­le­ar” strike, would roll over without re­tali­at­ing. It’s an as­sump­tion that strains credu­lity, and even Demo­crats aren’t buy­ing it.

“I’m not so sure how Sen. Mc­Con­nell would re­tali­ate, but I can guar­an­tee you that he will,” said Jim Man­ley, a former top Re­id aide.

Mc­Con­nell, or any oth­er minor­ity lead­er, would have plenty of op­tions.

Stripped of a voice on ex­ec­ut­ive branch nom­in­ees, the minor­ity could take the nom­in­ee fight up the chain, us­ing the fili­buster to block com­mis­sion­ers, justices or even a chair­per­son for the Fed­er­al Re­serve. And if they didn’t want to go that far, they’d have plenty of av­en­ues to add yet more de­lib­er­a­tion to the world’s most de­lib­er­at­ive body.

Much of the Sen­ate’s busi­ness — in­clud­ing the ap­prov­al of many nom­in­ees — these days is done via un­an­im­ous con­sent agree­ments, where meas­ures are ap­proved without a re­cor­ded vote. Angry over the nuc­le­ar op­tion, the minor­ity could make those a thing of the past. They could also vote down mo­tions to pro­ceed and force the cham­ber to go through 30 hours worth of de­bate post-clo­ture on every meas­ure, noted Sarah Bind­er, a seni­or fel­low at the Brook­ings In­sti­tute.

And there’s every chance Re­pub­lic­ans would find an­oth­er, more-ex­treme fili­buster re­place­ment that nobody has thought up yet.

Sound far-fetched? Look at Wis­con­sin, a fili­buster-free state where a simple ma­jor­ity is enough to pass meas­ures in both the as­sembly and state sen­ate.

That left a Demo­crat­ic minor­ity in the state Sen­ate with little re­course in 2011 when new Re­pub­lic­an Gov. Scott Walk­er, boos­ted by a ma­jor­ity in both cham­bers, was mov­ing budget le­gis­la­tion that would gut pub­lic uni­ons’ abil­ity to en­gage in col­lect­ive bar­gain­ing.

Liv­id over the le­gis­la­tion but without a way to block it, 14 Sen­ate Demo­crats re­sor­ted to a des­per­ate gam­bit: they fled to Illinois and went in­to hid­ing. By leav­ing the state, the le­gis­lat­ors took ad­vant­age of a then little-known rule that re­quired 60 per­cent of all sen­at­ors to be present for a vote on cer­tain types of le­gis­la­tion.

The sen­at­ors re­mained out-of-state — des­pite fa­cing daily $100 fines and an (ul­ti­mately un­suc­cess­ful) bid by Walk­er for law en­force­ment to bring them home — for nearly a month, delay­ing the bill while Madis­on, the state’s cap­it­al, ex­ploded in­to a mass-protest zone against the law.

Does any­one be­lieve that in the U.S. Sen­ate, a body with two-plus cen­tur­ies of rules and tra­di­tions, the minor­ity couldn’t find a sim­il­ar such bit of ar­cana to ex­ploit?

In Wis­con­sin, Walk­er and his fel­low Re­pub­lic­ans were able to dodge the quor­um re­quire­ment by strip­ping fisc­al pro­vi­sions from the bill, even­tu­ally passing Act 10 through the Sen­ate by an 18-to-1 mar­gin. But in­stead of the bi­par­tis­an­ship that nuc­le­ar op­tion pro­ponents prom­ise rules re­form would de­liv­er in the U.S. Sen­ate, the law has turned Wis­con­sin in­to a per­petu­al polit­ic­al war zone.

Walk­er faced a bit­ter re­call race, as did a host of state sen­at­ors on both sides of the aisle. And among the gen­er­al pop­u­la­tion, the par­tis­an di­vide widened. One in three re­spond­ents to a Mar­quette Uni­versity law school poll in 2012 said they had stopped talk­ing about polit­ics with a friend or re­l­at­ive.

In­side the state sen­ate, the bit­ter­ness wrought by Act 10 — as well as the en­su­ing flight of the Demo­crats — re­mains. “Some of the Re­pub­lic­an friends I had were not as friendly,” said Sen. Dave Hansen, one of the 14 Demo­crats to skip town in 2010.

Back in the U.S. Sen­ate, the pos­sib­il­ity of the nuc­le­ar op­tion — or even the threat of it — has already raised Re­pub­lic­an ire, es­pe­cially after the Sen­ate beat the dooms­day clock this sum­mer with a bi­par­tis­an deal.

“It would be really bad form,” said Ten­ness­ee Re­pub­lic­an Bob Cork­er. “If every time someone has con­cerns about nom­in­ees the nuc­le­ar op­tion comes up, you might as well be at a 51-vote threshold.”

Michael Catalin contributed to this article.
What We're Following See More »
The New Yorker Endorses Clinton
1 hours ago

The New Yorker has endorsed Hillary Clinton, saying that "barring some astonishment," she will become the next president. Calling Clinton "distinctly capable," the magazine excoriates Donald Trump as a candidate who "favors conspiracy theory and fantasy, deriving his knowledge from the darker recesses of the Internet and 'the shows.'" Additionally, the historical nature of the possibility of "send[ing] a woman to the White House" is not lost on the editors, who note the possibility more than once in the endorsement.

AT&T Seeks to Buy Time Warner
1 hours ago

AT&T agreed to a deal on Saturday to buy Time Warner Inc. for a reported $85.4 billion, a merger that would turn AT&T into a media giant. The two companies announced that they hope to have the deal closed by the end of 2017. However, the completion of the deal will likely not be smooth sailing, as the deal faces potential backlash from antitrust workers, as well as lawmakers. Following the merger's announcement, multiple lawmakers raised skepticism and said they plan to scrutinize the deal further, with Minn. Sen. Amy Klobuchar calling for a hearing.

Las Vegas Review-Journal Backs Trump
2 hours ago

The Las Vegas Review-Journal, owned by casino magnate and GOP donor Sheldon Adelson, became the first major city newspaper to endorse Donald Trump over the weekend.“Mr. Trump represents neither the danger his critics claim nor the magic elixir many of his supporters crave,” the editorial read, acknowledging concerns about Trump’s temperament. “But neither candidate will ever be called to the dais to accept an award for moral probity and character,” the paper said. “And we are already distressingly familiar with the Clinton way, which involves turning public service into an orgy of influence peddling and entitlement designed to line their own pockets — precisely what a disgruntled electorate now rises up to protest.”

Clinton Leads by 12 in ABC Tracking Poll
2 hours ago

Hillary Clinton leads Donald Trump by 12 percentage points among likely voters, 50 to 38 percent, in a new ABC News tracking poll, "her highest support and his lowest to date in ABC News and ABC News/Washington Post polls. Gary Johnson has 5 percent support, Jill Stein 2 percent. Clinton led by only four points in the last ABC/Post poll on Oct. 13.

Obama to Endorse 150 Down-Ballot Democrats
2 hours ago

President Obama "will make a late splash into races for state senate and assembly over the next week, endorsing roughly 150 candidates across 20 states. He’ll also back a candidate for the North Carolina Supreme Court. The endorsements — which will come along with a variety of robocalls, social media posts, mailers, photos of Obama with the candidates taken as he’s been traveling to campaign in recent weeks, and even a few radio ads — are Obama’s biggest investment in state races ever by far."


Welcome to National Journal!

You are currently accessing National Journal from IP access. Please login to access this feature. If you have any questions, please contact your Dedicated Advisor.