On Tuesday, Tester opened the door to the so-called “nuclear option,” which would allow the Senate to pass legislation with a simple majority.
The Montana senator reverses course and denies his earlier commitment to keeping the 60-vote hurdle.
I n November 2019, Montana’s Democratic senator was asked if there were any circumstances under which he could see himself voting to get rid of the Senate’s 60-vote hurdle for legislation. “Nope,” Tester told National Review.
But on Tuesday of this week, Tester opened the door to the so-called “nuclear option,” which would allow the Senate to pass legislation with a simple majority. “We’ll see what happens in the election, and we’ll see what happens with, you know, potential obstruction,” Tester told National Review.
Tester indicated he hadn’t changed his views on the filibuster because of the Senate GOP’s efforts to fill the current Supreme Court vacancy. In fact, Tester denied he’d changed his views at all:
NR: So you could potentially be open now to getting rid of the legislative filibuster?
Sen. Tester: Well, look. I mean, I’ve always been open to everything. I didn’t come here to not do anything. I came here to get things accomplished. And if people are willing to work together, I’m willing to work with them, and we’ll get some stuff accomplished.
NR: But in the past, you said you opposed the—
Tester: I think the filibuster serves an important purpose, but I also think that if there’s a lot of stonewalling that goes on, it doesn’t leave me a lot of choice.
NR: So have you changed your view on that?
Tester: Nope, that’s always been my view.
NR: You told me six [sic; actually eleven] months ago you wouldn’t get rid of it under any circumstances. I have a quote from you.
Tester: No, what I said was: I think the filibuster’s very important, and I think it makes for better legislation, and I still believe that. I still support the filibuster, but, like I said, we’ll see what happens with the other side. Who knows what’s going to happen?
Although Tester claimed this week that he’s “always been open to everything” on the filibuster, that is certainly not what he was saying in November 2019. Here’s the transcript of his exchange with National Review:
NR: Senator Tester, how committed are you to keeping the filibuster at 60 votes for legislation? [Arizona senator] Kyrsten Sinema last week said she’s firmly committed, I’m just trying to get the temperature of as many Senate Democrats—
Tester: Yeah, I would like to see it stay where it is. I don’t want the Senate to be the House.
NR: Could you see any circumstances that would make you change your mind?
Tester: Nope.
Tester’s opposition to abolishing the filibuster was important because the filibuster is the only thing that might stop Democrats in 2021 — if they sweep into power this November — from enacting a variety of left-wing policies, such as unlimited taxpayer funding of elective abortion or parts of the Green New Deal.
It’s not clear if any other Senate Democrats who have been firmly opposed to scrapping the filibuster have changed their views. West Virginia senator Joe Manchin said last year that he will “never” vote to get rid of the Senate’s 60-vote threshold. Manchin “still opposes eliminating the filibuster,” Manchin spokesman Sam Runyon tells National Review.
“They will not get my vote” to eliminate the Senate’s 60-vote requirement, Arizona Democrat Kyrsten Sinema told Politico last year. “In fact, whether I’m in the majority or the minority I would always vote to reinstate the protections for the minority. . . . It is the right thing for the country.” Sinema’s office did not immediately respond Wednesday to a voicemail and an email seeking comment.
Any commitment now has to be taken with a grain of salt, of course. Many senators from both parties have shown they are content to say one thing and do another — especially on matters of process.