View this email in your browser

January 20, 2021

Senate Leaders Negotiate the Biden Presidency

Plus, the inauguration that could be held, I don't know, with two
people in a room.

 

Inside the Capitol, the real work of the presidency begins. (Carolyn
Kaster/AP Photo)

It's January 20, 2021 and welcome to First 100, a chronicle of a
presidency yet to be foretold. We begin with...

The Chief

The focus today will be on the Capitol. Specifically, the outside of the
Capitol, where Joseph R. Biden, Jr. will become the 46th President. But
the outcome of that presidency, in very real terms, will be decided in
an office inside the Capitol. And Biden won't be involved in the
discussion.

That discussion will take place between Chuck Schumer and Mitch
McConnell, and it will set the rules for the Senate in the 117th
Congress. By about 4:30pm today, Jon Ossoff and Raphael Warnock will be
seated as Senators (check out our great piece from Eli Day

out today about how populism won in Georgia), and between them and Vice
President Kamala Harris, Democrats will have the advantage in the
chamber, and full control of Congress and the White House. But Schumer
and McConnell have to decide how that 50-50 Senate will operate. And
that's where the future of the Biden presidency will be decided.

Schumer and McConnell have been negotiating a power-sharing agreement
.
It's likely that it will run similar to 2001, when there was also a
50-50 Senate. You'll see an equal number of Democrats and Republicans
on committees, but Democrats, in control of the White House, will
control the floor schedule. (Equal committees does not mean that
legislation will endlessly get bottled up; you can send a bill that tied
in committee to the Senate floor.) But McConnell is asking for something
more.

Click to Support The American Prospect

Specifically, he wants Schumer to commit to maintaining the legislative
filibuster
.
And so far, Schumer is resisting this, and rightly so. There's no
reason to make this commitment. First of all, the Senate is a continuing
body, and the filibuster is in its rules until it isn't. A new
commitment doesn't do anything. Second of all, it can't possibly be
binding. If Schumer wants to nuke the filibuster and he has the votes,
he can just take the vote. And nobody in America will care, a belief I
base on all of American history, when Senate procedure was not the stuff
of deep import in the populace.

The third reason Schumer shouldn't agree to maintain the legislative
filibuster is that there shouldn't be a legislative filibuster. Joe
Biden released an immigration proposal

today that includes a pathway to citizenship for 11 million people.
It's not worth talking about, because 10 Republican Senators are never
going to vote for it. H.R. 1 and its Senate companion S.1
,
which would expand voting rights, ban dark money and gerrymandering, and
create a public financing system, is also not worth talking about,
because 10 Republican Senators are never going to vote for it. The
majority of the Congress is willing to advance some version of these two
bills, but the minority of Congress has a lock on their passage.

There's always budget reconciliation, of course. But the first word of
that phrase-"budget"-explains how limited such a procedure would
be. In fact it has created the modern way of thinking about the
legislative branch as mostly a taxing and spending authority
, without the
means to attend to anything else in the policy orbit. This narrows the
focus of corporate lobbyists, and it orients Congress toward tax breaks
and other odd kludges that can get through the process. (There's also
the Day One Agenda, which I wrote about today
.
But Biden seems lukewarm at best on using the power of the presidency to
implement existing law to the fullest extent possible.)

Support Independent, Fact-Checked Journalism

It doesn't befit a modern democracy. And it frustrates accountability,
the idea that people get what they vote for. Joe Biden, of course, is a
creature of the filibustered Senate, and he apparently still believes
it's 1973 and that the two parties can come together

in bipartisan comity and work for the common good. I'm... skeptical.
The best thing you can say is that Biden is putting this on as a show,
to make clear to the public who is denying progress. But that's not
generally how he's operated for 48 years in Washington. His belief in
a past that wasn't all that great, and grafting it onto a present
that's a political knife fight, will sow confusion and frustration.

The public has whipsawed back and forth between Democrats and
Republicans because neither side has been able to produce material
tangible benefits for them. Nuking the filibuster could establish the
unique idea that America votes and then actually gets what they vote
for, and can decide the success or failure of that agenda based on
actual information.

While some people try to make this about Joe Biden
,
it's really not. Joe Manchin and Kyrsten Sinema and every another
Democratic Senator who benefits from being the deciding vote are the
issue. If Democrats kill the filibuster they would be more responsible
for actually doing their job. They don't really want the
responsibility. They're the ones who need to be persuaded, either with
a lesser reform

(like requiring 41 votes against rather than 60 votes for) or just
torching the damn thing
.

Either way, Mitch McConnell doesn't really have a say in the matter.
And he shouldn't be given one. This is a stupid ploy to try to trap
Democrats into a failed system, to go part of the way to kneecap a
presidency. It should be rejected.

We Depend on Your Donations

Why Are We Doing This Again?

The President-elect will take the oath of office today, in front of a
sea of... well, National Guard troops. And yet the scene, from the
camera vantage point, will have all the trappings of a normal
inauguration: Biden taking the oath on a family Bible, giving an
inaugural address, the military band playing, greetings and
congratulations coming from members of Congress and other well-wishers.
And the big question is: why?

Why is there going to be a public inaugural on the Capitol steps
?
I ask this not because of the security situation. Yes, the rehearsal of
the inauguration was postponed

a day due to threats, but the Federal District in D.C. is essentially an
armed fortress right now
,
with not only National Guard and the Secret Service but actual Pentagon
troops deployed

on U.S. soil. Everyone's on edge, hyping up stories about an
evacuation that was actually due to a fire in a homeless encampment
, or about
the removal of a tiny number of Guard troops

with ties to the far right. But in reality, D.C. is incredibly secure (I
hope I don't have to eat my words, but I'm pretty certain); in fact,
too much so
,
as security measures like these, once put on, are rarely taken off.
I'd be more worried about statehouses across the country
.

That's not the reason to cancel the public inauguration. The pandemic
is the reason. D.C. is actually doing pretty good, relatively speaking.
But 20 Capitol police have tested positive since the Capitol Riot, and
several members of Congress. Dignitaries from across the political
spectrum will be on or near the dais. I'm sure it will be very
socially distanced and superficially safe. But there's no reason to
subject the leaders of the government, and more important all the
workers and support staff, to potential exposure. For what? Some macho
concept of not letting the (domestic) terrorists win? Some visual signal
to the world? Since when does that outrank public health?

Biden has not taken the bait throughout his presidential campaign and
transition, staying mostly confined to his basement and a theater in
Wilmington, Delaware, conducting his duties virtually. The throng
won't mass on the mall (and maybe that's only thanks to the Capitol
attack?), but enough people will be in enough of a confined space, if
only security personnel, to create needless danger, in the name of
spectacle. It's dumb.

See also Matt Cooper
.

Donations Are Tax Deductible

What Day of Biden's Presidency Is It?

Day 1. That of course means it's time for the Day One Agenda
. I wrote a roundup

of what executive actions Biden will take on Day One, but one came out a
little later that's worth noting. Biden is re-establishing the
Interagency Working Group on the Social Cost of Greenhouse Gases, and
directing it to issue an interim rule. This is something we specifically
called for in the Day One Agenda in a piece by Steve Novick
. In
setting the social cost of carbon, it will be much easier to "justify
the kind of dramatic regulatory action that's necessary to avoid
catastrophic climate change," as Novick writes. So score one for the
Day One Agenda!

We Can't Do This Without You

Today I Learned

* We head into the Biden era with 16.3 million vaccination shots

in arms. (Bloomberg)

* Trump burrowed a lot of loyalists

in the federal agencies. (Politico)

* Also former Trump aides do not have to abide

by any lobbying ban; Trump lifted the order last night, among the
pardons and commutations. (HuffPost)

* Biden's ethics pledge includes bans on golden parachutes for
government service
.
That's very good news. (Washington Post)

* I listened to a little of Janet Yellen's confirmation hearing

yesterday, it was unremarkable. Republicans are getting that deficit
religion again. (New York Times)

* Antony Blinken's hearing, incredibly, never mentioned WestExec
Advisors
,
the strategic consultancy he co-founded. (Wall Street Journal)

* I have mixed feelings about this potential White House antitrust czar
.
Centralizing power in the White House creates a bottleneck to prevent
progress. (Reuters)

* Look out private equity, which has been outsourced as a policy matter
to the Warren wing
.
(Politico)

**Click the social links below to share this newsletter**

 

[link removed]

 

[link removed]

 

[link removed]

 

[link removed]

 

[link removed]

 

[link removed]

YOUR TAX DEDUCTIBLE DONATION SUPPORTS INDEPENDENT JOURNALISM

Copyright (C) 2021 The American Prospect. All rights reserved.
_________________

Sent to [email protected]

Unsubscribe:
[link removed]

The American Prospect, Inc., 1225 I Street NW, Suite 600, Washington, DC xxxxxx, United States