And, Speaking Of The Filibuster ...

... as I promised in my previous post, I have more to say here about how Democrats who want to move the country forward can do so without worrying about the potential for filibuster abuse standing in the way.

Budget bills--anything dealing with raising revenue and/or spending it--cannot be filibustered, and, as a consequence, have been used (some would say abused) by both parties to accomplish goals that might be thwarted by way of a filibuster in a non-budget bill.  The Republicans launched this approach in passing taxes cuts under George W. Bush, and used it again to get tax cuts under Donald Trump.  In between, Barack Obama and congressional Democrats used it to get the Affordable Care Act into law.  So, whether the use of the budgeting process to achieve partisan goals without fear of a filibuster is wise, or fair, or desirable is something of a moot point.  Both parties have ratified it as a means to multiple ends, and so it has now become.

So, if the filibuster is, in some form, left in place, what hope does the budget process offer for getting past the Mitch McCONnells of the world, and enacting a progressive agenda for the nation?

Plenty.

As was the case in particular with the passage of the Affordable Care Act, making use of the budget process for this purpose involves a certain amount of what I would charitably describe as creativity.  The bill in question has to be one that principally has an impact on the federal budget, either to raise revenue or to spend it.  If it strays too far from that purpose, its opponents can request a ruling from the Senate parliamentarian as to whether the bill's impact is primarily budgetary in nature.  If the parliamentarian says that it does not, the bill then becomes subject to the filibuster rule.  In fact, during the sausage-like process that led to the so-called Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, modifications were made in consultation with the Senate parliamentarian to ensure that it would not be subject to a filibuster.

It's at this point that I'm inviting you to read this, if you have not done so already.

As a consequence of climate change, refugees and asylees are going to be a fact of life, whether we want them to be or not.  It is not a choice for them.  It's not going to be a choice for any of us.  And, whatever policy direction we choose to take, that choice is going to cost a great deal of money.  And, if we choose to go in the direction that is consistent with our heritage, as well as our humanity, we can use the budget power of Congress, filibuster-free, to fund an immigration system with more staff to process visa applications and adjudicate asylee cases, and a combination of lower fees along with streamlined rules to make entering and leaving the country on a legal basis simpler and more likely.  

And, in saying this as a principal in an immigration firm, I'm actually speaking against my self-interest.  A system like the one I'm describing would be less dependant on lawyers.

There's no reason, in fact, why this basic approach couldn't be utilized across other issues that matter to progressives.  Climate change means that people are on the move, but science has been on the move with it, and has given us the means to fight it sustainable energy and renewable resources.  The budget process can, as it already has, be utilized to promote the development of both industries--and, at the same time, provide jobs, including jobs in areas with historic underdevelopment and unemployment (including, of course, neighborhoods with a high percentage of people of color).

I am, in one sense, getting ahead of myself with all of this.  Progressive policies, in any case, require a government led by progressive leaders.  That means winning elections, and doing it in a time of corruption in our politics that has no historical parallel.  But that state of affairs just makes it all the more important to spare no effort--no fair effort--to ensure that a government led by progressive leaders is exactly what we have as of this coming January 20.

And, when that happens, not let the filibuster rule stop us from giving the American people the rule of law they've been denied for the past three-and-a-half years.