Well, it didn’t take long for Ms. Kamala to jump into the filibuster fray, and, unsurprisingly, she has thrown her support behind Biden’s latest absurd suggestion: a talking filibuster.
Currently, 60 affirmative votes in the Senate are required to pass legislation, which is what enabled the Senate to block some of Trump’s attempted actions before. However, now Biden seems in favor of “a talking filibuster.”
In case “a talking filibuster” sounds nuts, that is because it is … as explained by Biden himself this week.
“I don’t think that you have to eliminate the filibuster, you have to do it what it used to be when I first got to the Senate back in the old days … You had to stand up and command the floor, you had to keep talking.” [Source: Fox News]
First and foremost, any footage available of Biden “standing up and commanding the floor?” As that would be quite the change from what the world is witnessing now.
Plus, “back in the old days?” No wonder Trump was so on point when he commented that he’d done more in the past 47 months than Biden had done in the past 47 years, in one of his many brilliant performances during the debates.
In addition, Biden’s proposal sounds rather preposterous: He is essentially advocating Senators standing up and running their mouths all day and apparently all night if necessary, all to avoid dealing with the actual passage of a bill.
Given the rather obvious preference most politicians have for talking over acting, it is no surprise that Biden is essentially advocating inaction. Though from a Democrat perspective, apparently ultimate inaction is still “work,” as stated by Biden himself (again).
“You’ve got to work for the filibuster.” [Source: Politico]
Right, Biden. “Work” really hard at spewing nonsense all day and all night while the American people carry on the real work of moving the nation forward and keeping the industrial machine humming.
And McConnell himself is not very happy with Biden’s suggestion, especially when he highlights the reality of a talking filibuster.
“I want our colleagues to imagine a world where every single task, every one of them, requires a physical quorum. Which, by the way, the vice president does not count in determining a quorum. This chaos would not open up an express lane for liberal change. … The Senate would be more like a 100-car pileup, nothing moving.” [Source: Fox News]
In other words, McConnell is complaining that Senators have to show up in person to do their jobs instead of “phoning in,” an apparent option for Senators, albeit an option that sounds a bit less private than meeting in person inside the Senate chambers.
McConnell also highlighted his own experience with the filibuster, warning the Democrats about what may happen in the future if they fixate on “instant gratification.”
“My colleagues and I have refused to kill the Senate for instant gratification … I meant it. Republicans meant it. Less than two months ago, two of our Democratic colleagues said they mean it too. If they keep their word, we have a bipartisan majority that can put principle first and keep the Senate safe.” [Source: Fox News]
Even Biden himself, at least back in 2005, seemed to have more of a clue about major decisions for short term gratification, especially when he advised against the Senate acting “rashly.”
“The Senate ought not act rashly by changing its rules to satisfy a strong-willed majority acting in the heat of the moment.” [Source: Politico]
However, Biden’s tune apparently has changed, especially when considering his most recent comments this week.
“It’s getting to the point where, you know, democracy is having a hard time functioning.” [Source: Fox News]
Well, gee, Biden, imagine that.
Has it ever occurred to him that democracy “is having a hard time functioning” due to his own draconian executive orders, not to mention his own party’s rather blatant militantism and extremism?
Yeah, democracy would have “a hard time functioning,” especially when the promise of national unity appears to have flown out the window on Day 1.