President Trump\u2019s call for Republicans to \u201ctake over\u201d voting procedures in more than a dozen states and \u201cnationalize\u201d the midterm elections has Republican senators debating filibuster reform to get around Democratic opposition to a bill that would require voters to show proof of citizenship.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah), a staunch Trump ally and chair of the GOP\u2019s Senate Steering Committee, says Republicans have power under the Senate rules to force Democrats to hold the floor continuously to filibuster and block the SAVE Act, legislation that would require voters to present birth certificates and passports when registering to vote.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
But the proposal to interpret the Senate rules in a way to make it tougher for members of the minority party to block legislation through the filibuster is already getting strong pushback from some senior Republicans.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Sen. Jerry Moran (R-Kan.), chair of the Senate Veterans\u2019 Affairs Committee, said he\u2019s worried that requiring Democrats to actively stand and speak for hours and hours to slow down legislation will create a massive traffic jam on the Senate floor.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
And he worries Democrats will use retaliatory tactics to derail the GOP agenda that would require Republican senators to be constantly on call to vote at a moment\u2019s notice to establish a quorum.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\u201cI think it is an impossible solution. It\u2019s not a solution. It creates circumstances in which the minority can have one person on the floor and the majority has to have a quorum call just consistently,\u201d Moran said.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
He said filibusters would become so time-consuming and exhausting for both parties that it increases the momentum for ending the 60-vote threshold for passing legislation through the Senate.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
He warned that requiring Democrats to use standing or talking filibusters to slow down legislation would likely paralyze the floor for weeks or months.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\u201cYou can occupy the floor for months and no other business gets considered,\u201d Moran said.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Senate Budget Committee Chair Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) said requiring talking filibusters would \u201cchange the Senate\u201d and likely lead to the abolition of the filibuster entirely.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\u201cFilibuster changes, I think, change the Senate. It may happen one day, but I don\u2019t think it\u2019s a good idea,\u201d he said.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\u201cBecause the Senate becomes the House,\u201d he added, referring to the strict majoritarian rule in the lower chamber.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Lee and other conservatives in both chambers, however, see a powerful ally in Trump who they believe can help pressure Senate GOP leaders to force Democrats to use a \u201cstanding filibuster\u201d to oppose the election reform legislation.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
They believe that will enhance the chances of passing the controversial bill, because a standing filibuster is an arduous process that would be difficult for the minority party to sustain for longer than a few days.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Trump gathered Republicans at a White House breakfast in November to demand they do away with the Senate\u2019s filibuster rule altogether, an idea Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-S.D.) politely declined to pursue.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Two House Republicans who were holding out against a Senate-passed government funding package this week \u2014 Reps. Anna Paulina Luna (Fla.) and Tim Burchett (Tenn.) \u2014 said they received assurances from Trump that Thune would seriously consider forcing Democrats to stage a standing filibuster if he brought the SAVE Act to the Senate floor.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Luna and Burchett ended up voting to advance the funding package after speaking with Trump.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Thune confirmed Tuesday that Senate Republicans will discuss reinterpreting the Senate rules to make it tougher for the minority party to block legislation, but he emphasized he hasn\u2019t committed to going forward with the plan.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\u201cWe got some members, as you know, who have expressed an interest in that, so we\u2019re going to have a conversation about it. But there weren\u2019t any commitments made,\u201d Thune told reporters.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Asked if he would really consider require Democrats senators to stand up and speak for hours to delay legislation, Thune noted that doing so could come back to bite Republicans as they try to push other legislative priorities, such as permitting reform and a farm bill.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\u201cThere are a lot of implication and ramifications to that, that I think our conference would need to have a conversation about. Obviously, it ties up the floor indefinitely, so it means you\u2019re not doing other things. There\u2019s always an opportunity cost,\u201d Thune warned.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
He said requiring Democrats to wage a standing filibuster is an \u201cexercise that would go on for an indefinite period of time.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Speaking again to reporters later Tuesday, Thune said Trump\u2019s call to \u201cnationalize\u201d the elections was an endorsement of the SAVE Act, which would also require states to frequently purge voter rolls to remove registered voters no longer considered active.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The Senate rules in recent years have been interpreted to allow the minority party to filibuster legislation merely by stating an objection. Under current practice, senators generally are not required to actively be on the floor to speak for hours and hours at their desks.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Lee and other conservatives want to change that tradition.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
They say the Senate did not always require the passage of a 60-vote cloture motions to advance legislation.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\u201cWe have to remember that the cloture standard is not itself a condition of passage. It\u2019s a way of ending debate. For most of the history of the United States Senate, cloture didn\u2019t exist,\u201d he said.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
He says the Senate should go back to the tradition of letting senators debate a bill until they are too exhausted to continue, and then move the legislation to a final up-or-down vote.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
But the Utah senator acknowledged it could take weeks until Democrats run out of energy to oppose the SAVE Act.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\u201cThe question is not whether it\u2019s difficult; we know that it is. The question is whether we have an obligation and opportunity to do something,\u201d he said.<\/p>\n\n\n\n