Manchin's Retirement Means the (Eventual) End of the Filibuster

Sens. Joe Manchin (D-WV) & Kyrsten Sinema (I-AZ)

Joe Manchin's retirement does solidify something that we knew going into next year.  In my predictions for 2024, I'd rate control of the House & the White House as Tossups (the House is maybe Slight Dem, but not by much...the White House is a proper tossup), while the Senate is Republican-favored, but the Democrats are not out of the game yet (we likely won't know for sure there until next June whether Democrats are DOA).  But Manchin's retirement indicates something we do know-if, and I mean if the Democrats manage to sink the trifecta basket (where they would win the White House, the Senate, and the House), they will have the most progressive Congress (relative to the common nomenclature of that word) since the 1930's, possibly ever.

We know this because Manchin will no longer be the median senator in that scenario, and with Kyrsten Sinema polling so poorly as to be nothing more than a spoiler, neither of them are tracking to be in the next Congress.  Sinema and Manchin have, at least in the public consciousness, been the two senators who have been the most conservative during the Biden years, though that doesn't entirely pan out when you look at their actual voting records.  Take a peak at a site like Progressive Punch, which ranks the Senate's voting records, and you'll find that Angus King & Tom Carper's lifetime scores are to the right of Sinema (this makes sense, both of them have become more liberal over time), and Jon Tester is slightly to the right of Sinema in the current Congress.  But Sinema & Manchin have most crucially been the two senators that have held up the filibuster, which is honestly the most important thing holding back a Democratic trifecta.

There's this perception (because Manchin & Sinema say it every chance they get) that the filibuster is helping create bipartisanship in Congress, but that's not really the case.  It's more so a situation where it blocks bipartisan legislation being more common.  Let's take a look, to start with, on the subject of abortion.  Currently there are 51 US Senators who are largely or completely pro-choice, 48 US Senators who are largely or completely anti-choice, and one US Senator (Bob Casey) who occupies an unusual space in the middle, though in recent years he has indicated he would support codifying Roe.  The filibuster prevents us from passing any legislation regarding abortion rights because you need sixty senators to pass abortion rights into law, a benchmark that is simply not possible in modern America in the past 20 years, it's only happened once, briefly during President Obama's first term, with a much more conservative Democratic caucus.  You need to get rid of the filibuster in order to make abortion legal.

What gets lost in that conversation is that, if we have a Senate without a filibuster, it's probable that the legislation would pass with bipartisan support.  Sens. Susan Collins (ME) & Lisa Murkowski (AK) are both pro-choice, and it is likely would end up backing a bill that would nationally grant abortion rights, thus making it bipartisan.  With Manchin in office, it's certain that opposition would also be bipartisan, given that he does not support abortion rights, though he'd likely be the only Democrat to vote against in this Congress (Casey has said he'd support codifying even though he has a mixed record on abortion, and Sinema certainly would given she's very liberal on abortion rights).  Thus, this is a bipartisan piece of legislation that is being held up by the current Senate, and it proves that Sinema would not be the median senator on this issue (it'd likely be Casey, Murkowski, or Collins) given her strong backing of abortion rights.  The filibuster not only prevents bipartisan legislation, but it also makes deal-making a lot looser-the median senator would shift rather than just kind of not existing except for on reconciliation bills (where it's always been Sinema or Manchin during the Biden years).

What becomes interesting in the hypothetical scenario of the next Congress is that this "median senator" theory becomes even harder to guess.  The most likely scenario of a Dem trifecta in 2025 is essentially Gallego beating Sinema and Jon Tester/Sherrod Brown scraping together a winning coalition despite Trump winning their state (again, not the most likely scenario, but a plausible one).  According to a site like Progressive Punch, Jon Tester would probably be Senator #50 in this scenario as a whole, but not on most issues.  

There's an assumption that a lot of senators don't actually support overturning the filibuster fully, and are using Sinema/Manchin for cover, but I think that's a bit overdone (if they didn't support, they'd have spoken up by now), and probably support a version of the filibuster that would bust easily.  Every single Democratic Senator, or potential Democratic Senator, has said in some capacity they support filibuster reform or the abolition of it entirely (unless I'm missing someone-bring it to the comments).  So assuming the filibuster is gone (or largely defunct), this Senate could pass virtually any legislation with just 50 votes.  On abortion, you could craft a pretty much universal "legalize abortion" bill nationwide under that scenario as long as Casey didn't object (without even needing Murkowski or Collins).  The Equality Act would be in the same situation, where all fifty Democratic senators have expressed public support (though, again, you could probably write a version that gives some senators cover by getting Murkowski & Collins onboard...but you wouldn't have to).

Senator #50 on other less universal issues would move around who the fiftieth senator was.  On issues like student loans, your fiftieth senator would likely be Elissa Slotkin, while on immigration or gun laws it would almost certainly be Jon Tester.  Climate change would be a hard read; you couldn't pass a fracking ban given the positions of people like Casey, Tester, and both of New Mexico's senators, but you likely could craft a pretty strong climate bill, particularly if Susan Collins was willing to sign on (she's generally got a pretty strong record on environmental issues, especially headed into an election year, though she'd be no guarantee).  

Suffice it to say-the median senator would shift, and that would be a great thing for the country.  The biggest issue with Manchin & Sinema has not been that they are moderates, but that they have held back all progress on major issues like immigration and abortion rights.  A Democratic trifecta without a filibuster wouldn't be a rubber stamp situation, but it would mean that there would be the possibility for progress on pretty much every major part of the Democratic platform.  That would be enormous, and would also continue to show that DC can be an outlet for good for all Americans.