Democrats are reacting to an opinion piece by Sen. Kyrsten Sinema (D-AZ), published in The Washington Post, wherein she defended her stance against ending the filibuster.
“Filibuster supporters be like: we should let Republicans destroy democracy now because at some indeterminate time in the future they may try again,” said Rep. Mondaire Jones (D-NY-17), taking a subtle dig at Sinema.
Filibuster supporters be like: we should let Republicans destroy democracy now because at some indeterminate time in the future they may try again.
— Mondaire Jones (@MondaireJones) June 22, 2021
“this [sic] is unbelievably weak,” New York Times columnist Jamelle Bouie said, adding that the piece ranges “being demonstrably false to disingenuous to delusional.”
these assertions range from being demonstrably false to disingenuous to delusional pic.twitter.com/Tbl6FxkbCU
— b-boy bouiebaisse (@jbouie) June 22, 2021
“Sinema’s argument amounts to an argument against the exercise of power at all since, if you use it, what happens when the other side does too?” Bouie said, continuing her rant.
Bloomberg reporter Steven Dennis took issue with Sinema’s characterization that the filibuster prevents programs like Medicaid from being rapidly cut.
“To those who want to eliminate the legislative filibuster to expand healthcare access or retirement benefits: Would it be good for our country if we did, only to later see that legislation replaced by legislation dividing Medicaid into block grants, slashing earned Social Security and Medicare benefits, or defunding women’s reproductive health services?” Sinema’s opinion piece said.
“Kyrsten Sinema’s op-ed seems to forget that Medicare, Medicaid and other spending programs can be completely eliminated with 50+VP via budget reconciliation,” Dennis noted.
Kyrsten Sinema’s op-ed seems to forget that Medicare, Medicaid and other spending programs can be completely eliminated with 50+VP via budget reconciliation https://t.co/s9RuAwz1es pic.twitter.com/R2wwWwmzfz
— Steven Dennis (@StevenTDennis) June 22, 2021
“My support for retaining the 60-vote threshold is not based on the importance of any particular policy. It is based on what is best for our democracy. The filibuster compels moderation and helps protect the country from wild swings between opposing policy poles,” Sinema wrote in her piece.
Staff writer Jake Johnson at the progressive outlet Common Dreams derided that argument as “well-worn.”
These are the latest attacks against Sinema from the progressive wing of the Democrat Party, some members of which accused her of supporting Jim Crow for her refusal to vote to abolish the filibuster.
Progressives turned up the heat on Sinema and Sen. Joe Manchin (D-WV), both Democrats in traditionally Republican states, as they attempted to ram H.R. 1, a far-left voting rights overhaul, through the Senate.
That effort failed Tuesday.
– – –
Pete D’Abrosca is a contributor at The Arizona Sun Times and The Star News Network. Follow Pete on Twitter. Email tips to [email protected].
Photo “Kyrsten Sinema” by Gage Skidmore. CC BY-SA 2.0.
