More stories

  • in

    House Democrats tell Senate: exempt voting rights bill from filibuster

    US voting rightsHouse Democrats tell Senate: exempt voting rights bill from filibusterFilibuster exception would allow Democrats to push through their voting rights reform bill over unanimous Republican opposition Hugo Lowell in Washington DCTue 13 Jul 2021 03.00 EDTLast modified on Tue 13 Jul 2021 03.01 EDTTop Democrats in the House are spearheading a new effort to convince the Senate to carve out a historic exception to the filibuster that would allow them to push through their marquee voting rights and election reform legislation over unanimous Republican opposition.The sweeping measure to expand voting rights known as S1 fell victim to a Republican filibuster last month after Senate minority leader Mitch McConnell and his leadership team unified the conference to sink the bill in a party-line vote.Now, furious at Republicans for weaponizing the filibuster against Joe Biden’s legislative agenda, House majority whip James Clyburn is pushing Senate Democrats to end its use for constitutional measures, according to sources familiar with the matter.The rare and forceful effort from a member of the House leadership to pressure changes in the Senate underscores the alarm among Democrats that the filibuster may be an insurmountable obstacle as they race to overturn a wave of Republican ballot restrictions.Ending the use of the filibuster for constitutional measures – and lowering the threshold to pass legislation to a simple majority in the 50-50 Senate – is significant as it would almost certainly pave the way for Democrats to expand voting across the US.The voting rights and election reform legislation remains of singular importance to Democrats as they seek to counter new voter restrictions in Republican-led states introduced in response to Trump’s lies about a stolen 2020 presidential election.Clyburn’s proposal to change Senate rules is intended to be limited. It would not eliminate the filibuster entirely, and would allow senators in the minority party to continue to deploy the procedural tactic on other types of legislation.The problem, as Democrats see it, is that Republicans in recent years have all but rewritten Senate rules to force supermajorities even for bills that carry bipartisan support. Filibustering bills, once extremely rare, has now become routine.The proposal to create an exception to the filibuster for constitutional measures mirrors the exception Democrats carved out for judicial nominations in 2013, after Republicans blocked former President Obama’s picks for cabinet posts and the federal judiciary.Clyburn’s proposal is particularly notable, the sources said, since it is broadly supported by the rest of the House Democratic leadership and is considered by House Speaker Nancy Pelosi to be the only way to break the logjam in the Senate.The effort to create exceptions to the filibuster is being led by Clyburn in large part because of the influence he carries with the White House and the affinity he enjoys with Biden on a personal level, the sources said. Clyburn, a South Carolina congressman, was influential in securing his state for Biden in the 2020 race for the Democratic nomination – something that rescued Biden’s campaign from disaster.When Biden endorsed partial reforms to the filibuster in March, the prospect of Democrats taking action to defang the minority party’s ability to stall legislation, shifted almost overnight from a theoretical question to a possible reality on Capitol Hill.The details of what Biden endorsed was far less important than the fact he backed reform at all, and Clyburn, encouraged by that reception, has spoken to White House counsellor Steve Ricchetti and Vice President Harris to back his proposal, the sources said.McConnell, the top Republican in the Senate, told the Guardian on Monday he was deeply unimpressed by Clyburn’s maneuvers. “If it’s not broken, it doesn’t need fixing,” McConnell said of the filibuster, adding he would “absolutely” oppose any changes.Clyburn’s outreach to top Senate Democrats and the Biden administration comes after Senate majority leader Chuck Schumer brought the issue of filibuster reform to the forefront by forcing votes last month on some of Biden’s most high-profile measures.The idea was to show to moderate Democrats opposed to filibuster reform – most notably Joe Manchin and Kyrsten Sinema – that Republicans under McConnell will sink any Democratic policy proposals in an attempt to obstruct the administration.Schumer is still strategizing over how to advance S1 after vowing to reintroduce the bill following its defeat, according to a source familiar with his thinking. “In the fight for voting rights, this vote was the starting gun, not the finish line,” Schumer said.But carving out an exception to the filibuster for constitutional measures such as voting rights legislation, first floated by the number three Senate Democrat Patty Murray, appears to be the primary option despite resistance from the likes of Manchin and Sinema.Democrats open to making the change have previously indicated that their argument that the minority party should not have the power to repeatedly block legislation with widespread support resonates with the wider American public.They have also suggested that only partially ending its use could have fewer consequences for them should their political fortunes reverse as soon as after the 2022 midterms and they are thrust into the minority, trying to block Republican legislation.“The people did not give Democrats the House, Senate and White House to compromise with insurrectionists,” House Democrat Ayanna Pressley wrote on Twitter after Republicans blocked S1, illustrating the sentiment. “Abolish the filibuster so we can do the people’s work.”TopicsUS voting rightsUS SenateHouse of RepresentativesUS politicsDemocratsnewsReuse this content More

  • in

    How Trump’s big lie has been weaponized since the Capitol attack

    The fight to voteUS voting rightsHow Trump’s big lie has been weaponized since the Capitol attackImmediately after the riot Republicans continued to object to election results – and efforts to restrict voting and push the big lie have only grown in the six months since The fight to vote is supported byAbout this contentSam Levine in New YorkWed 7 Jul 2021 07.00 EDTLast modified on Wed 7 Jul 2021 08.38 EDTSign up for the Guardian’s Fight to Vote newsletterHours after the US Capitol was secured against a violent insurrection on 6 January, the Senate reconvened in a late-night session to move ahead with certifying Joe Biden’s electoral college victory. It was a dramatic moment designed to send a clear message: democracy would prevail.“To those who wreaked havoc in our Capitol today, you did not win. Violence never wins. Freedom wins,” the then vice-president, Mike Pence, said as senators reconvened. “As we reconvene in this chamber, the world will again witness the resilience and strength of our democracy.”“They tried to disrupt our democracy. They failed,” Mitch McConnell, the Republican leader, said on the Senate floor.But while the attack on the Capitol failed on 6 January, the attack on US democracy has continued unabated. It continued immediately after the riot, when Republican lawmakers continued to object to the electoral college results in that late-night session, and has only grown in the six months that followed.“We saw the makings of the big lie between November and January, but the consequences of the big lie seem much worse now, six months later, than even in the midst of the big lie leading up to January 6,” said Ned Foley, a law professor at the Ohio State University.In state capitols across the country, Republicans have weaponized lies about the 2020 election to push laws that make it harder to vote. They have embraced amateur inquiries into election results that have already been audited. And they have enacted measures that make it easier to remove local election officials from their posts, opening up the possibility of partisan meddling in future elections. A quarter of Americans, including a staggering 53% of Republicans, believe Donald Trump is the “true president”, a May Reuters/Ipsos poll found.“The fact that the January 6 insurrection didn’t scare us and prompt many Republicans to start aggressively rejecting those claims, and instead Republicans continue to embrace those claims as a justification for imposing additional restrictions means that our democracy remains in real trouble,” said Franita Tolson, a law professor at the University of Southern California.While Donald Trump and his allies failed in their effort to get local election officials to overturn the election, Republicans across the US have moved to make it easier to overturn future elections.After Aaron Van Langevelde, a Republican appointee on the Michigan board of canvassers, refused to block the certification of his state’s election results, Republicans declined to reappoint him to a new term. In Georgia, Republicans stripped the secretary of state, Brad Raffensperger, of his role as chair of the state elections board after Raffensperger, a Republican, pushed back on Trump’s claims of fraud. Under a new law, the legislature will appoint the chair of the board, which now has the power to remove local election officials from their posts.In Arkansas, Republicans passed a new law authorizing a legislative committee to investigate election complaints and allows the state’s board of election commissioners to take over running elections in a county if the board believes there is an election violation “would threaten either a county’s ability to conduct an equal, free, and impartial election, or the appearance of an equal, free and impartial elections”. In Iowa, Republicans enacted a new law that imposes new criminal penalties on election workers for failing to adhere to election law.The most visible effort to undermine the election results continues in Arizona, where the Republican state senate authorized an unprecedented inquiry into ballots and voting equipment in Maricopa county, the largest in the state. The effort, funded by Trump allies, is being led by a firm with little experience in election audits and whose founder has expressed support for the idea that the election was stolen. It also comes after two previous county audits affirmed the results of the 2020 race.Even as experts have raised alarms about the Ariziona inquiry, which includes far-fetched ideas like looking at ballots for bamboo fibers, Republicans in other US states have embraced it. There are calls for similar reviews in Pennsylvania, Georgia and Michigan, among other places.Republicans have also continued the ethos of the 6 January attack by enacting measures that make it harder to vote after a presidential election that saw the highest turnout in nearly a century. In Georgia, the same new law that allows for interference in elections also requires voters to provide identification information both when they request and return a mail-in ballot. The same law also curtails the availability of mail-in ballot drop boxes, allows for unlimited citizen challenges to voter qualifications, and prohibits volunteers from distributing food and water while standing in line to vote.In Florida, a state long praised for its widespread use of mail-in ballots, Republicans enacted a measure that significantly limits drop boxes and requires voters to provide identification information when they request a mail-in ballot. Iowa Republicans also passed a law that cuts the early vote period by nine days, and requires polls to close earlier.In Montana, Republicans tightened voter ID requirements, made it harder for third parties to collect and so voters can no longer register at the polls on election day – a move that will probably have a big impact on the state’s sizable Native American population. In Arizona, where mail-in voting is widely used, Republicans changed a state policy so that voters could no longer permanently remain on a list allowing them to automatically receive a mail-in ballot for every election.While Republicans ultimately weren’t successful in blocking the certification of Joe Biden’s win, there are still deep concerns that it could succeed next time.The Electoral Count Act, the law that governs the counting of electoral votes, appears to authorize state legislatures to step in and appoint electors in the event of a failed election, but offers no guidance on what would constitute such a scenario. If there is a dispute between the houses of Congress over a state’s slate of electors, the same federal law defaults to whichever group of electors has been certified by a state’s governor. Republicans are poised to take control of the US House in 2022, a perch from which they could wreak havoc when it comes time to count electoral votes.Federal law also says that Congress isn’t supposed to second-guess the certification of electors as long as states reach an official result by the so-called “safe harbor” deadline about a month after election day. But when members of Congress and senators objected to the electoral college results in January, Foley noted, there was little discussion of that deadline, which every state except Wisconsin met in 2020.Foley, the Ohio state professor, has been worried about the ambiguities in the Electoral Count Act long before 2020, warning that Congress was ill-equipped to resolve a legitimately disputed close election. He has urged Congress to revisit and clarify the law before the next election crisis.But last year, he was alarmed at how far Trump and allies took their fight over the election, even with little evidence of fraud.“As I look ahead to 2024, I think the pathology that’s going on culturally with respect to acceptance of defeat, the inability to accept defeat, that is really, really dangerous,” he said. “That seems new in a way we haven’t seen.”TopicsUS voting rightsThe fight to voteUS Capitol attackUS politicsfeaturesReuse this content More