Yes, and yes — and end the filibuster while we're at it
/• One of the hottest ideas among the goo-goo (good government) reform community has been the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact, in which consenting states would commit to pledging their electoral college votes to the winner of the popular vote, no matter how their state’s votes came out. This compact is almost certainly unconstitutional, but can anyone imagine California right now saying, “Oh, okay, we’ll award our electoral college votes to Trump.” If the compact had been in force for this election, here’s how the electoral vote would turn out:
Heh
Likewise, if Congress has a sense of humor, it should call these clowns as witnesses at a hearing on the first day to testify in support of a bill to add four seats to the Supreme Court immediately:
(FWIW) : Don’t forget the Democrats’ other pet project:
Sadly, much as the Democrats (and Trump) want to abolish the filibuster, a few Republicans of principle have vowed to keep it.
California’s new senator (sigh) Adam Schiff is all for getting rid of the thing:
Schiff said he’d prefer major swings in policy to the current gridlock, emphasizing that killing the filibuster is the only way to pass abortion rights, gun safety and voting rights measures and to mitigate climate change. He said he doesn’t worry about Republicans’ using a filibuster-free Senate to reverse liberal gains when they take power.
“The Republican policies are so reactionary, backward and unpopular that should they ever really be in a position to put them into effect, they’ll be voted out of office in a heartbeat,” he said.
And Trump has pushed to nuke it, but …
If Trump and Republicans sweep the election, GOP senators would probably face pressure from Trump to do away with the filibuster. He repeatedly demanded that they nuke the 60-vote rule during his term as president. Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., refused in 2017 and 2018. Although McConnell is stepping down as GOP leader, it's unclear whether Trump would be more successful this time.
Sen. Thom Tillis, R-N.C., said he expects a push to kill the filibuster to toughen immigration laws if the GOP wins in November.
“Quite honestly, if we run the table politically in November and we have control of both chambers and President Trump has the White House, it wouldn’t surprise me if getting additional tools to get the border under control would be used as an argument for nuking the filibuster,” Tillis told reporters.
But he said he would adamantly oppose that.
“The day Republicans vote to nuke it is the day I resign,” Tillis said, arguing that it would “destroy the Senate.”
And from Texas, and Florida, more opposition:
Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, who faces a competitive re-election bid, said he’s committed to preserving the 60-vote rule even if his party sweeps the election and Democrats use it to stymie legislation.
“Yes,” he replied when asked.
Sen. Rick Scott, R-Fla., who also faces re-election this fall, said, “I believe in the filibuster.”
Even if Republicans have control and it threatens their agenda?
“I believe in the filibuster,” he repeated.
I personally had agreed with the opponents of all three of these propositions: the National Public Vote Compact; packing the Supreme Court; and abolishing the filibuster, but in the face of the powerful arguments put forth in their favor by distinguished Democrat politicians and “thinkers” like Lawrence Tribe, it would be awfully presumptuous of me to disagree.
So bring ‘em on. Here’s to you, Chuck Schumer.
