Connect with us

Politics

Commentary: The U.S. Senate is a mess. He wants to fix it, from the inside

Published

on

Commentary: The U.S. Senate is a mess. He wants to fix it, from the inside

To say the U.S. Senate has grown dysfunctional is like suggesting water is wet or the nighttime sky is dark.

The institution that fancies itself “the world’s greatest deliberative body” is supposed to serve as a cooling saucer that tempers the more hotheaded House, applying weight and wisdom as it addresses the Great Issues of Our Time. Instead, it’s devolved into an unsightly mess of gridlock and partisan hackery.

Part of that is owing to the filibuster, one of the Senate’s most distinctive features, which over roughly the last decade has been abused and misused to a point it’s become, in the words of congressional scholar Norman J. Ornstein, a singular “weapon of mass obstruction.”

Democrat Jeff Merkley, the junior U.S. senator from Oregon, has spent years on a mostly one-man crusade aimed at reforming the filibuster and restoring a bit of sunlight and self-discipline to the chamber.

In 2022, Merkley and his allies came within two votes of modifying the filibuster for voting rights legislation. He continues scouring for support for a broader overhaul.

Advertisement

“This is essential for people to see what their representatives are debating and then have the opportunity to weigh in,” said Merkley, speaking from the Capitol after a vote on the Senate floor.

“Without the public being able to see the obstruction,” he said, “they [can’t] really respond to it.”

What follows is a discussion of congressional process, but before your eyes glaze over, you should understand that process is what determines the way many things are accomplished — or not — in Washington, D.C.

The filibuster, which has changed over time, involves how long senators are allowed to speak on the Senate floor. Unlike the House, which has rules limiting debate, the Senate has no restrictions, unless a vote is taken to specifically end discussion and bring a matter to resolution. More on that in a moment.

In the broadest sense, the filibuster is a way to protect the interests of a minority of senators, as well as their constituents, by allowing a small but determined number of lawmakers — or even a lone member — to prevent a vote by commanding the floor and talking nonstop.

Advertisement

Perhaps the most famous, and certainly the most romanticized, version of a filibuster took place in the film “Mr. Smith Goes to Washington.” The fictitious Sen. Jefferson Smith, played by James Stewart, talks to the point of exhausted collapse as a way of garnering national notice and exposing political corruption.

The filibustering James Stewart received an Oscar nomination for lead actor for his portrayal of Sen. Jefferson Smith in the 1939 classic “Mr. Smith Goes to Washington.”

(From the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences)

In the Frank Capra classic, the good guy wins. (It’s Hollywood, after all.) In real life, the filibuster has often been used for less noble purpose, most notably the decades-long thwarting of civil rights legislation.

Advertisement

A filibuster used to be a rare thing, its power holstered for all but the most important issues. But in recent years that’s changed, drastically. The filibuster — or, rather, the threat of a filibuster — has become almost routine.

In part, that’s because of how easy it’s become to gum up the Senate.

Members no longer need to hold the floor and talk nonstop, testing not just the power of their argument but their physical mettle and bladder control. These days it’s enough for a lawmaker to simply state their intention to filibuster. Typically, legislation is then laid aside as the Senate moves on to other business.

That pain-free approach has changed the very nature of the filibuster, Ornstein said, and transformed how the Senate operates, much to its detriment.

The burden is “supposed to be on the minority to really put itself … on the line to generate a larger debate” — a la the fictive Jefferson Smith — “and hope during the course of it that they can turn opinions around,” said Ornstein, an emeritus scholar at the American Enterprise Institute. “What’s happened is the burden has shifted to the majority [to break a filibuster], which is a bastardization of what the filibuster is supposed to be about.”

Advertisement

It takes 60 votes to end a filibuster, by invoking cloture, to use Senate terminology. That means the passage of legislation now effectively requires a supermajority of the 100-member Senate. (There are workarounds, which, for instance, allowed President Trump’s massive tax-and-spending bill to pass on a 51-50 vote, with Vice President JD Vance casting the tie-breaker.)

The filibuster gives outsized power to the minority.

To offer but two examples, there is strong public support for universal background checks for gun buyers and greater transparency in campaign finance. Both issues have majority backing in the Senate. No matter. Legislation to achieve each has repeatedly been filibustered to death.

That’s where Merkley would step in.

He would not eliminate the filibuster, a prerogative jealously guarded by members of both parties. (In a rare show of independence, Republican senators rejected President Trump’s call to scrap the filibuster to end the recent government shutdown.)

Advertisement

Rather, Merkley would eliminate what’s come to be called “the silent filibuster” and force lawmakers to actually take the floor and publicly press their case until they prevail, give up or physically give out. “My reform is based on the premise that the minority should have a voice,” he said, “but not a veto.”

Forcing senators to stand and deliver would make it more difficult to filibuster, ending its promiscuous overuse, Merkley suggested, and — ideally— engaging the public in a way privately messaging fellow senators — I dissent! — does not.

“Because it’s so visible publicly,” Merkley said, “the American citizens get to weigh in, and there’s consequences. They may frame you as a hero for your obstruction, or a bum, and that has a reflection in the next election.”

The power to repair itself rests entirely within the Senate, where lawmakers set their own rules and can change them as they see fit. (Nice work, if you can get it.)

The filibuster has been tweaked before. In 1917, senators adopted the rule allowing cloture if a two-thirds majority voted to end debate. In 1975, the Senate reduced that number to three-fifths of the Senate, or 60 members.

Advertisement

More recently, Democrats changed the rules to prevent filibustering most presidential nominations. Republicans extended that to include Supreme Court nominees.

Reforming the filibuster is hardly a cure-all. The Senate has debased itself by ceding much of its authority and becoming little more than an arm of the Trump White House. Fixing that requires more than a procedural revamp.

But forcing lawmakers to stand their ground, argue their case and seek to rally voters instead of lifting a pinkie and grinding the Senate to a halt? That’s something worth talking about.

Advertisement

Politics

The Speaker’s Lobby: What Congress’ December script means for healthcare next year

Published

on

The Speaker’s Lobby: What Congress’ December script means for healthcare next year

NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!

This December on Capitol Hill appears to follow a familiar script.

There’s a deadline for Congress to act on (insert issue here). And if lawmakers don’t move by Jan. 1, then (insert consequence here). So, everyone on Capitol Hill clamors over pathways to finish (given issue). Lawmakers and staff are at the end of their wits. Everyone is worried about Congress successfully fixing the problem and getting everyone home for the holidays.

There’s always the concern that Congress will emerge as The Grinch, pilfering Whoville of Christmas toys.

But lawmakers often wind up toiling with the diligence and efficiency of Santa’s elves, plowing through late-night, overnight and weekend sessions, usually finishing (insert issue here) in the St. Nick of time.

Advertisement

THE HITCHHIKER’S GUIDE TO THURSDAY’S BIG SENATE VOTES ON HEALTHCARE

This pattern is always the same. With few variations.

This parliamentary dance of the sugar plum fairies frequently centers on deadlines for government funding, the debt ceiling and tax policy. Such was the case when the Senate passed the first version of Obamacare on Christmas Eve morning in 2009. Republicans skated on thin ice to finish their tax reform package in December 2017.

Lawmakers moved expeditiously to approve a defense policy bill in late 2020, then made sure they had just enough time on the calendar to override President Trump’s veto of the legislation before the very end of the 116th Congress in early January 2021.

The deadlines sometimes veer into the political. There was a crush to finish articles of impeachment on the House floor for both presidents Clinton and Trump in December 1998 and December 2019, respectively.

Advertisement

And, so, after everyone got this fall’s government shutdown worked out of their systems, lawmakers were far from prepared to address its root cause. Democrats refused to fund the government unless Congress addressed spiking healthcare premiums. Those premiums shoot up on Jan. 1. And no one has built enough consensus to pass a bill before the end of the year.

Yet.

This December is playing out like many others on Capitol Hill. (Celal Gunes/Anadolu via Getty Images)

But it’s only mid-December. And everyone knows that the congressional Christmas legislative spirit can be slow to take hold. Some of that holiday magic may have officially arrived Thursday afternoon after the Senate incinerated competing Republican and Democratic healthcare plans.

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., pushed a three-year extension of the current Obamacare subsidies with no built-in reforms.

Advertisement

“This is going to require that Democrats come off a position they know is an untenable one and sit down in a serious way and work with Republicans,” Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., said of the Democratic proposal.

Thune characterized the Democrats’ gambit as “a political messaging exercise.”

MODERATE REPUBLICANS STAGE OBAMACARE REBELLION AS HEALTH COST FRUSTRATIONS ERUPT IN HOUSE

Republicans even mulled not putting forth a healthcare plan at all. It was the group of Senate Democrats who ultimately helped break a filibuster to reopen the government last month that demanded a healthcare-related vote (not a fix, but a vote) in December. So, that’s all Thune would commit to.

“If Republicans just vote no on a Democrat proposal, we’ll let the premiums go up and Republicans don’t offer anything. What message is that going to send?” asked Sen. Josh Hawley, R-Mo. “I know what people in Missouri will think. They’ll look at that, and they’ll say, ‘Well, you guys don’t do anything. You’ve just let my premiums go up.’”

Advertisement

It may yet come to that.

Sen. Josh Hawley, R-Mo., questioned what message “no” votes by his party would send. (Valerie Plesch/Bloomberg via Getty Images)

So, there’s a holiday healthcare affordability crisis.

“People are looking now at exactly what’s ahead for them, and they’re very, very frightened,” said Sen. Ron Wyden, D-Ore., the top Democrat on the Senate Finance Committee.

But most Senate Republicans coalesced around a plan drafted by Senate Finance Committee Chairman Michael Crapo, R-Idaho, and Senate Health Committee Chairman Bill Cassidy, R-La. The bill would not renew Obamacare subsidies. Instead, it would allow people to deposit money into a healthcare savings account and shop around for coverage.

Advertisement

“Our plan will reduce premiums by 1% and save taxpayers money,” boasted Crapo. “In contrast, the Democrats’ temporary COVID bonuses do not lower costs or premiums at all.”

With skyrocketing prices, Republicans are desperate to do something, even if it’s a figgy pudding leaf, as they face competitive races next year.

COLLINS, MORENO UNVEIL OBAMACARE PLAN AS REPUBLICANS SEARCH FOR SOLUTION TO EXPIRING SUBSIDIES

“It has nothing to do with me. It has everything to do with people in Ohio and across America who need to be able to afford access to healthcare,” said Sen. Jon Husted, R-Ohio.

Gov. Mike DeWine, R-Ohio, appointed Husted to succeed Vice President Vance after he left the Senate. So, 2026 will be Husted’s first time on the ballot for the Senate.

Advertisement

There was some chatter that Republicans might allow for a limited extension of the Obamacare aid so long as Democrats agreed to abortion restrictions in exchange.

“Off the table. They know it damn well,” thundered Schumer.

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., said abortion restrictions in exchange for a limited extension are “off the table.” (Tom Williams/CQ-Roll Call, Inc via Getty Images)

So, the competing plans needed 60 yeas to clear a procedural hurdle. But that also meant that both plans were destined to fail without solving the problem before the end of the year.

“We have to have something viable to vote on before we get out of here,” lamented Sen. Thom Tillis, R-N.C.

Advertisement

That’s why some Christmas congressional calendar magic often compels lawmakers to find a last-minute solution.

“Every legislator up here would like to be home for Christmas,” said Sen. Roger Marshall, R-Kan. “That pressure is what forces us to come together.”

CONGRESS FACES HOLIDAY CRUNCH AS HEALTH CARE FIX COLLIDES WITH SHRINKING CALENDAR

We’ll know soon if everyone buckles down to harness soaring premiums after days of political posturing.

“This should have been done in July or August. So, we are up against a deadline,” said Hawley.

Advertisement

And procrastination by lawmakers may yet do them in.

“Healthcare is unbelievably complicated,” said Rep. Dusty Johnson, R-S.D. “You’re not going to reform it and bring down costs overnight.”

House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., is promising a separate healthcare bill. (J. Scott Applewhite/AP Photo)

House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., is now promising a separate, still unwritten healthcare bill for the floor in the coming days.

“You’re going to see a package come together that will be on the floor next week that will actually reduce premiums for 100% of Americans,” said Johnson.

Advertisement

But it’s unclear if Congress can pass anything.

“I think there’s a fear of working with Democrats. There’s a fear (of) taking action without the blessing of the President,” said Rep. Susie Lee, D-Nev.

GOP WRESTLES WITH OBAMACARE FIX AS TRUMP LOOMS OVER SUBSIDY FIGHT

That’s why it’s possible Congress could skip town for the holidays without solving the problem.

“It will be used like a sledgehammer on us a year from now,” said Rep. Don Bacon, R-Neb.

Advertisement

Not a great message for Republicans — especially on affordability — before the midterms.

“If there’s no vote, that’ll run contrary to what the majority of the House wants and what the vast majority of the American people want,” said Rep. Kevin Kiley, R-Calif.

Rep. Kevin Kiley said a no vote runs contrary to the will of the American people. (Scott Strazzante/Pool/Getty Images)

That political concern may be just enough to force the sides to find some Christmas magic and address the issue before the holidays.

That’s one Yuletide script in Congress.

Advertisement

But there’s a script to not fixing things, too.

If Congress leaves town, every communications director on Capitol Hill will author a press release accusing the other side of channeling Ebenezer Scrooge, declaring “Bah humbug!” or dumping a lump of coal in the stockings of voters on Christmas.

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

That’s the script.

And every year, it sleighs me.

Advertisement

Continue Reading

Politics

House Dem to force Trump impeachment vote on 2 articles

Published

on

House Dem to force Trump impeachment vote on 2 articles

NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!

Rep. Al Green, D-Texas, filed articles of impeachment against President Donald Trump on Wednesday and will force the House of Representatives to vote on the measures this week.

Green made his resolution to impeach Trump privileged on Wednesday, meaning the House must vote on the issue within two legislative days. Green has introduced articles of impeachment against Trump at least five times this year, but he has not before tried to force a vote on the issue.

Green’s impeachment filing accuses Trump of “calling for the execution of six Democratic lawmakers” and of making threats of violence against judges. The former refers to Trump’s reaction after Democratic lawmakers urged members of the military to “refuse illegal orders.”

“President Trump is an abuser of presidential power who, if left in office, will continue to promote violence, engender invidious hate, undermine our democracy, and dissolve our Republic,” Green said in a statement.

Advertisement

SIX DEMOCRATS URGE MILITARY MEMBERS TO ‘REFUSE ILLEGAL ORDERS’ IN VIRAL VIDEO; HEGSETH RESPONDS

Rep. Al Green will force the House to vote on his articles of impeachment. (Reuters and AP Photo/Alex Brandon)

Green has failed several times to gather support among Democrats for impeaching Trump. House Democrats voted to kill a Green impeachment effort in June, that one based on Trump ordering airstrikes on Iran.

Trump is not the only member of his administration to face impeachment efforts, however. House Democrats also filed articles against Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and War Secretary Pete Hegseth this week.

Rep. Haley Stevens, D-Mich., announced the move against Kennedy on Wednesday, arguing he has failed in his role. Stevens had previously vowed to file the articles in September.

Advertisement

ANTI-TRUMP NETWORK BEHIND MASS PROTESTS CRACKS OPEN WAR CHEST AGAINST DEMS WHO BACKED REOPENING GOVERNMENT

Rep. Al Green, D-Texas, filed two articles of impeachment against Trump on Wednesday. (Alex Wong/Getty Images)

“Today, I formally introduced articles of impeachment against Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. RFK Jr. has turned his back on science and the safety of the American people. Michiganders cannot take another day of his chaos,” she wrote in a statement posted on social media.

Meanwhile, Rep. Shri Thanedar, D-Mich., targeted Hegseth, pointing to reports that he issued orders to “kill everybody” onboard a small vessel that was allegedly involved in drug trafficking.

Both HHS Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and War Secretary Pete Hegseth are facing articles of impeachment from House Democrats. (HHS)

Advertisement

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

“Pete Hegseth has been using the United States military to extrajudicially assassinate people without evidence of any crime,” said Thanedar. “Former military attorneys have come out and asserted that his conduct constitutes war crimes. We cannot allow his reprehensible conduct to continue, which is why I have filed these articles to impeach him.”

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Politics

Commentary: In Trump’s regime, Catholics are among the most powerful — and deported

Published

on

Commentary: In Trump’s regime, Catholics are among the most powerful — and deported

Her brown face, green mantle and forgiving gaze is a mainstay of Southern California: In front yards. As murals. On decals flashing from car windows and bumpers. Sold at swap meets in the form of T-shirts, ponchos, statues, bags and so much more.

Tomorrow, it will be the feast day of Our Lady of Guadalupe, and She couldn’t come soon enough. 2025 will go down as one of the best and worst years ever to be a Catholic in the United States.

Members of my faith are in positions of power in this country like never before. Vice President JD Vance is a convert. A majority of the Supreme Court are practicing Catholics. Names of past Catholic diasporas like Kennedy, Bondi, Loeffler and Rubio dot Trump’s Cabinet. This week, he became the first president to formally recognize the Feast of the Immaculate Conception, a Catholic holy day celebrating Mary, the mother of Jesus.

“For nearly 250 years, Mary has played a distinct role in our great American story,” Trump declared, offering a brief Catholic history of the United States that would’ve made this country’s Puritan forefathers retch. He even shouted out Our Lady of Guadalupe’s feast day, commending the “steadfast devotion to Mary that originated in the heart of Mexico.”

It’s the second year in a row where Trump has wrapped himself in the Empress of the Americas. Last year, he shared Her famous image on social media on Sept. 8, when Catholics celebrate the birth of the Virgin Mary, with the caption “Happy birthday, Mary!”

Advertisement

I wish I could say Guadalupe is changing Trump’s shriveled excuse of a heart. But it’s impossible to reach that conclusion when so many Catholics in the U.S. face unholy persecution because of his deportation deluge.

A study released earlier this year by a coalition of evangelical and Catholic groups found that 61% of immigrants at risk of deportation in this country identify as Catholic, while nearly one-fifth of U.S. Catholics “would be impacted” by someone being deported. The latter figure is nearly three times the rate that evangelicals face and four times the rate of other Christian denominations.

Guadalupanos — people with a special devotion to Guadalupe, the overwhelming majority of whom are Latino — can’t even venerate Her in peace this year because of Trump.

The neighborhood house that I visit every year to pray the novena in honor of Guadalupe with others has seen way fewer people than last year. In Chicago, where immigration agents terrorized residents all fall, officials at the Shrine of Our Lady of Guadalupe in suburban Des Plaines are seeing the same even as they adopt security measures to reassure attendees. Out in the Coachella Valley, a beloved pilgrimage in honor of la guadalupana held for more than 20 years was canceled, with organizers announcing on Facebook in Spanish that the faithful should instead do a “spiritual interior pilgrimage where our mother invites us to keep us united in a secure environment.”

Since July, San Bernardino diocese bishop Alberto Rojas has allowed Catholics to skip Mass because of all the raids in the Inland Empire. He was joined this week by Diocese of Baton Rouge Bishop Michael Duca as la migra now roams Louisiana. “We should be anticipating the joy of Christmas, surrounded by our family in celebration,” Duca wrote, “instead of the experience of anxiety and fear.”

Advertisement

The late Pope Francis meets with U.S. Vice President JD Vance and delegation during an audience at Casa Santa Marta on April 20 in Vatican City. A day later, Francis died at age 88.

(Vatican Pool / Getty Images)

That’s the sad irony of seeing Catholicism have such a prominent role in Trump’s second term. The main defamers of Catholics in the United States have been Protestants since the days of the founding fathers. They cast successive waves of immigrants — Irish, Italians, Poles, Mexicans, Vietnamese — as evil, stupid immigrants beholden to Rome. They wrongly predicted each group would ruin the American way of life.

Now that Catholics are at the top, they’re the ones pushing policies that persecute the new generation of immigrants, Catholic and not. They mock the exhortations of church leaders to follow the Bible’s many commands to protect the stranger, the meek, the least and the poor by arguing that deporting the undocumented is somehow righteous.

Advertisement

That’s why, as we end a terrible year and Trump vows to escalate his cruel anti-immigrant campaign in the next one, Catholics and non-Catholics alike need to remember who Our Lady of Guadalupe is like never before. She’s more than just an iconic image; this dark-skinned María stands against everything Trump and his brand of Catholicism preaches.

The faithful believe that Guadalupe appeared in 1531 near modern day Mexico City — not before the conquering Spanish priests who were destroying the old ways of the Aztecs and other Indigenous groups, but to the conquered who looked like her. The manuscript that shared her story with the world quoted her as promising to “hear all their cries … and remedy all their miseries, sorrows, and pains.”

Siding with the underdogs against the elites is why Mexicans carried Guadalupe’s banner in the War of Independence and during the Mexican Revolution. Why Cesar Chavez carried her during United Farm Workers marches and why generations of Chicano artists have reimagined la virgencita as everything from a bikini-clad model to a jogger — the more quotidian, the better.

It’s why there are 19 parishes, sanctuaries and missions named after her in the dioceses of Orange, Los Angeles and San Bernardino — by far the most of any saint, sacrament or Marian apparition in the Southland. It’s why the late Pope Francis regularly celebrated mass in honor of Guadalupe’s feast day at the Vatican and admonished those who wished to “gain ideological advantage over the mystery of Guadalupe” last year during a homily at St. Peter’s Basilica. Presiding over the service was Cardinal Robert Prevost, who is now Pope Leo XIV and whose devotion to Guadalupe is such that he was consecrated as a bishop 11 years ago this Dec. 12.

It’s why Guadalupe has emerged as a symbol against Trump’s deportation Leviathan.

Advertisement

Her message of hope for the poor over the privileged stands in contrast to the limousine Catholics who dominate Trumpland. They’re the ones that have successfully spent millions of dollars to move the church in the United States to the right (55% of Catholics chose Trump last year), repeatedly tried to torpedo the reforms of Pope Francis and are already souring on Pope Leo for describing Trump’s raids as “extremely disrespectful” to the dignity of migrants. They’re the ones who have expressed more outrage over the assassination of conservative firebrand Charlie Kirk this fall than the suffering that millions of their fellow Catholics have endured all year under Trump.

Our Lady of Guadalupe, grant us the strength to fight back against the Herod of our time.

Continue Reading

Trending