Here are the questions I posed in my last post, with the answers:
- COULD THE CREATION OF A VOTING RIGHTS EXCEPTION TO THE FILIBUSTER BE JUSTIFIED IN TERMS OF HISTORY AND CONTEXT? The GOP would undoubtedly argue that the Founding Fathers left voting issues to the states, where they should remain. However, voting is a foundational right; the workings of the entire system depend on it. There have been federal rules regarding elections for over a century. Finally, the FFs’ intentions were superseded by the Civil War and the Reconstruction Amendments. The federal government is the ultimate guarantor of civil rights relating to voting–not the states. The new act is a totally appropriate way to implement the Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendments.
- IS THE CREATION OF SUCH A LIMITED EXCEPTION SUSTAINABLE? In the long run, probably not; it reminds me of “Don’t ask, don’t tell.” However, in the short run, it might work. Voting is an important and discrete subject, and it isn’t clear that the GOP will have much incentive to use it as a wedge for the total abolition of the filibuster in the foreseeable future.
- HOW WOULD THE GOP REACT? By shutting the Senate down, to the extent they can. By provoking debt ceiling crises and government shutdowns. By encouraging militia activity during elections. It would get ugly, fast.
If you’re Joe Manchin, is it worth it? Frankly, that’s a pretty tough call. I still think he should use his leverage with both sides to force a reasonable compromise.