Dem
49
GOP
51
You might have heard that abortion is going to be a big issue in this election. And, just in case you or anyone else hasn't heard, the Democratic Party is doing everything it can to make sure everyone keeps their eye on that particular ball (and not on the distractor that is Haitians eating dogs and cats).
Undoubtedly, readers are familiar with the criticisms that Kamala Harris doesn't do interviews, and isn't putting forward specific policy positions she supports. Well, yesterday, Harris did an interview with Wisconsin Public Radio, and in it she put forward a very specific policy position: She supports a filibuster carve-out that would allow the Senate to pass a bill codifying the right to an abortion nationwide. Here are her exact words:
I think we should eliminate the filibuster for Roe, and get us to the point where 51 votes would be what we need to actually put back in law the protections for reproductive freedom and for the ability of every person and every woman to make decisions about their own body and not have their government tell them what to do.
Again, she is very specifically speaking of a carve-out, and not a wholesale ending of the filibuster.
We emphasize that point because, less than an hour after the Harris interview aired, Sen. Joe Manchin (I-WV) had a hissy fit and announced that he would not be endorsing Harris for president. He decreed:
Shame on her. She knows the filibuster is the Holy Grail of democracy. It's the only thing that keeps us talking and working together. If she gets rid of that, then this would be the House on steroids.
We will note three things here. First, Manchin is disingenuously doing what the right-wing media are also doing right now, and behaving as if Harris called for a complete and total end to the filibuster. As we note above, she most certainly did not. Second, the so-called "Holy Grail of democracy" barely existed until the 1960s, did not exist in its current form until 1975, and did not truly become an offensive weapon until the 1990s. Somehow, the country managed to survive 200 years without its "Holy Grail." Third, and finally, does Manchin really think that Congress is working well right now? Really?
We just do not get this guy; he's either stupid, willfully ignorant, shamefully dishonest, or some combination of the above. And it certainly does not weaken the "Manchin is stupid" thesis, we will point out, that he is misusing the "Holy Grail" metaphor here. A holy grail is something that is not already in hand, and is sought, like "a cure for cancer is the holy grail of modern medicine," or "cold fusion is the holy grail of modern physics," or "the director's cut of The Magnificent Ambersons is the holy grail of lost films." We suspect that what the Senator meant is that the filibuster is the crown jewel of democracy. Even then, he's still wrong.
Of course, if Harris is elected, her promise doesn't actually mean all that much. The executive branch doesn't get a vote when it comes to Senate procedures. And, more importantly, the Senate's procedures aren't going to change unless there are at least 51 votes for it. That almost certainly means at least 50 Democratic senators. It's possible that it could be done with 49 Democrats plus Lisa Murkowski (R-AK) and Susan Collins (R-ME), but if those two women were open to such an arrangement, it could also be executed right now (doing an end run around Manchin and Kyrsten Sinema, I-AZ). The fact that it has not been executed suggests pretty strongly that one or both are not willing.
This is not to say that Senate Democrats are doing nothing when it comes to abortion (though they aren't doing much because, again, filibuster, not to mention a GOP-controlled House). Some readers will have seen the story published last week by ProPublica, about the tragic death of Amber Nicole Thurman. In 2022, Thurman took abortifacient pills, and had complications when not all the fetal tissue was expelled from her body. This requires a relatively simple fix, a dilation and curettage, that any hospital should be able to perform. However, the Georgia hospital to which Thurman turned for help could not do it, because post-Dobbs, that procedure was illegal in the state. For 20 hours, Thurman lingered, in agony, while a severe infection spread and became septic. Finally, the doctors decided they were able to operate, but by then it was too late, and she died.
This bit of reporting has actually prompted two responses from Senate Democrats. First, Sen. Ron Wyden (D-OR) is going to hold hearings into the matter, to try to determine if the staff of the hospital broke any laws in failing to treat Thurman in a timely manner. Second, Majority Leader Chuck Schumer is teeing up a pair of bills for votes. The first, sponsored by Patty Murray (D-WA), would guarantee everyone the right to emergency health care, regardless of what state abortion laws might say. The second, sponsored by Tammy Baldwin (D-WI), would give a tax break to women who have to travel to procure an abortion, so as to offset their costs. These bills have failed before, and they will fail now—they're just messaging bills, at this point, meant to give Democratic candidates for office something to talk about as they campaign over the next 45 days.
And speaking of talking about abortion on the campaign trail, let's also pass along the story of how Ohio GOP U.S. Senate candidate Bernie Moreno managed to shoot himself in the foot last week (his remarks were recorded as part of a town hall held last Friday, but were not broadcast until Monday of this week). Asked about abortion access, the candidate declared:
You know, the left has a lot of single issue voters. Sadly, by the way, there's a lot of suburban women, a lot of suburban women that are like, "Listen, abortion is it. If I can't have an abortion in this country whenever I want, I will vote for anybody else."... Okay. It's a little crazy by the way, but—especially for women that are like past 50—I'm thinking to myself, "I don't think that's an issue for you."
That's tone deaf on something like six different levels, and even has many Republicans firing back at Moreno. Given that it's a close race, but one where Sen. Sherrod Brown (D-OH) appears to be leading, Moreno probably did not benefit from insulting both younger women (by suggesting they are voting foolishly) and older women (by suggesting they have no skin in the game anymore). Anyhow, it's an example of how the Democrats absolutely can benefit if they compel Republicans to address abortion on the campaign trail, as the Senate messaging bills are trying to do. (Z)