Categories
Politics

Democrats and Activists Deal with the Filibuster After a Defeat on Voting Rights

For Democrats, the only way to break their voting rights legislation free of Republican opposition is by changing the Senate’s filibuster rules — an institution-shaking step that so far remains out of reach. But while the filibuster is proving hard to kill, it has been wounded.

The unanimous Republican refusal to allow the Senate to open a debate sought by every Democrat on the expansive elections and ethics measure — coupled with the recent filibuster of other legislation with bipartisan support — has armed opponents with fresh evidence of how the tactic can be employed to give the minority veto power over the majority.

Democrats and activists say the increasing Republican reliance on the filibuster will only intensify calls to jettison it and potentially bring about critical mass for a rules change as Democrats remain determined to pass some form of the elections measure and other parts of their agenda opposed by Republicans.

“I think as people see them stopping more things, minds might change,” Senator Amy Klobuchar, Democrat of Minnesota and one of the chief sponsors of the voting bill, said on Wednesday.

Ms. Klobuchar, who leads the Rules Committee, is planning to conduct a field hearing on voting rights in Georgia to build public support for the legislation, choosing a state where Republican lawmakers have put in place restrictive voting rules after sustaining election losses.

The White House, which has been criticized for not engaging aggressively enough on voting rights, is promising more from President Biden on the issue next week, though Mr. Biden, a senator for 36 years, has not explicitly endorsed eliminating the filibuster.

But to curb the power of the filibuster through a rules change, all 50 Democrats would have to agree to do so on the floor, and so far Senators Joe Manchin III of West Virginia and Kyrsten Sinema of Arizona have expressed strong public opposition to doing that. Ms. Sinema’s latest pronouncement came in a Washington Post op-ed published just before this week’s procedural vote, much to the frustration of some of her colleagues.

Other Democrats also remain reluctant to make significant changes to the filibuster, though they are much less outspoken than their two colleagues. One of them, Senator Angus King, a Maine independent who votes with Democrats and has previously voiced openness to changing the filibuster rule, said on Wednesday that doing so still felt premature.

“I don’t think we are done trying to find a solution,” Mr. King said, referring to long-shot attempts to lure Republicans to support a compromise on voting legislation. “We need to give them another chance to see how they feel about democracy.”

As they regroup, Democrats involved in shaping the voting rights measure agreed the next step was to produce a narrower version incorporating some of the changes sought by Mr. Manchin that their party could then rally around. That willingness to accept elements of Mr. Manchin’s proposal won his support on Tuesday for beginning debate on the legislation, allowing Democrats to present a unified front.

Senator Jeff Merkley, Democrat of Oregon and a chief author of the elections bill, said Democrats and Mr. Manchin could then try anew to recruit Republicans behind the revised bill — a prospect he acknowledged was unlikely to succeed.

Multiple Republicans have said they cannot see themselves backing any Democratic proposal imposing new voting rules on states. Senator Mitch McConnell, Republican of Kentucky and the minority leader, has drawn a firm line against cooperating with Democrats and most Republicans will be very reluctant to cross him, counting on Mr. Manchin and Ms. Sinema to keep their commitment not to alter the filibuster rules requiring 60 votes to proceed on legislation.

“If that fails,” Mr. Merkley said on Wednesday about new outreach to Republicans, “then the 50 of us who want to defend our Constitution, defend the right to vote, stop billionaires from buying elections have to be in a room and figure out how do we get around Mitch McConnell obstructing this.”

Though he was not specific, Senator Chuck Schumer, Democrat of New York and the majority leader, said on Tuesday after the vote that Democrats “have several serious options for how to reconsider this issue and advance legislation to combat voter suppression.”

“We will leave no stone unturned,” he said on Wednesday. “Voting rights are too important.”

But Mr. Schumer has other items on his to-do list, notably an infrastructure proposal prized by the White House that will consume much, if not all, of July, detracting from efforts to highlight both the voting rights measure and the drive to rein in the filibuster.

Pressed on how they can hope to convert Mr. Manchin and Ms. Sinema considering how strongly they have registered their opposition, Democrats and antifilibuster activists noted that Mr. Manchin only a few weeks ago had been dead set against the expansive voting rights bill. Democrats appeared to have lost his vote only to see him come forward with his own plan and join them on Tuesday.

The Battle Over Voting Rights

After former President Donald J. Trump returned in recent months to making false claims that the 2020 election was stolen from him, Republican lawmakers in many states have marched ahead to pass laws making it harder to vote and change how elections are run, frustrating Democrats and even some election officials in their own party.

    • A Key Topic: The rules and procedures of elections have become central issues in American politics. As of May 14, lawmakers had passed 22 new laws in 14 states to make the process of voting more difficult, according to the Brennan Center for Justice, a research institute.
    • The Basic Measures: The restrictions vary by state but can include limiting the use of ballot drop boxes, adding identification requirements for voters requesting absentee ballots, and doing away with local laws that allow automatic registration for absentee voting.
    • More Extreme Measures: Some measures go beyond altering how one votes, including tweaking Electoral College and judicial election rules, clamping down on citizen-led ballot initiatives, and outlawing private donations that provide resources for administering elections.
    • Pushback: This Republican effort has led Democrats in Congress to find a way to pass federal voting laws. A sweeping voting rights bill passed the House in March, but faces difficult obstacles in the Senate, including from Joe Manchin III, Democrat of West Virginia. Republicans have remained united against the proposal and even if the bill became law, it would most likely face steep legal challenges.
    • Florida: Measures here include limiting the use of drop boxes, adding more identification requirements for absentee ballots, requiring voters to request an absentee ballot for each election, limiting who could collect and drop off ballots, and further empowering partisan observers during the ballot-counting process.
    • Texas: Texas Democrats successfully blocked the state’s expansive voting bill, known as S.B. 7, in a late-night walkout and are starting a major statewide registration program focused on racially diverse communities. But Republicans in the state have pledged to return in a special session and pass a similar voting bill. S.B. 7 included new restrictions on absentee voting; granted broad new autonomy and authority to partisan poll watchers; escalated punishments for mistakes or offenses by election officials; and banned both drive-through voting and 24-hour voting.
    • Other States: Arizona’s Republican-controlled Legislature passed a bill that would limit the distribution of mail ballots. The bill, which includes removing voters from the state’s Permanent Early Voting List if they do not cast a ballot at least once every two years, may be only the first in a series of voting restrictions to be enacted there. Georgia Republicans in March enacted far-reaching new voting laws that limit ballot drop-boxes and make the distribution of water within certain boundaries of a polling station a misdemeanor. And Iowa has imposed new limits, including reducing the period for early voting and in-person voting hours on Election Day.

At the same time, some Democrats who had been reluctant to tinker with the filibuster, like Senators Jon Tester of Montana and Chris Coons of Delaware, have expressed some willingness to do so now if Republicans maintain their blockade against the voting rights bill, though they have not taken a definitive stance.

“Time will tell,” Mr. Tester said on Wednesday about what his position would be if it came to a filibuster showdown.

After already investing heavily in campaigns in the news media, antifilibuster activists intend to use the coming two-week Senate recess to build more support for the voting rights bill and put pressure on Democrats to change the filibuster to enact it.

“This is going to be a huge motivating factor for grass-roots activists across the country to take this procedural loss and turn it into a legislative win,” said Meagan Hatcher-Mays, the director of democracy policy for the progressive group Indivisible, one of several organizations planning events while senators are back home.

Past confrontations have shown that building to significant changes in Senate rules can take some time. In 2013, Harry Reid, then the Senate Democratic leader, spent months making the case on the Senate floor that Republicans led by Mr. McConnell were unfairly using the filibuster to impede President Barack Obama from filling important judicial vacancies with highly qualified nominees.

For most of that time, Mr. Reid appeared to lack the support to institute a rules change with Democratic votes. But by November 2013, most Senate Democrats had had enough and voted to eliminate the 60-vote threshold to advance most executive branch nominees over strenuous Republican objections.

Mr. Reid, watching from afar in Nevada, said he believed something similar would eventually happen when Democratic frustration with Republican filibusters boiled over.

“The filibuster is on its way out,” Mr. Reid said in an interview. “There is no question in my mind that the filibuster is going to be a thing of the past shortly. You can’t have a democracy that takes 60 percent of the vote to get things done.”

Categories
Business

Amazon Employees Defeat Union Effort in Alabama

Amazon fought back the most significant labor dispute in its history on Friday when a tally showed that workers at its huge Alabama warehouse had voted firmly against the formation of a union.

Workers cast 1,798 votes against a union, which gave Amazon enough to forcefully thwart efforts. According to federal officials, the vote for a union was 738, less than 30 percent of the vote.

The one-sided outcome at the 6,000-person warehouse in Bessemer, Alabama dealt a heavy blow to work organizers, Democrats and their allies at a time when conditions were ripe for unions to move forward.

Amazon, which has repeatedly suppressed labor activism, appeared to be vulnerable as it faced increasing scrutiny of its market power and influence in Washington and around the world. President Biden signaled support for the union effort, as did Senator Bernie Sanders, the independent Vermonter. The pandemic, which caused millions of people to shop online, also shed light on the plight of key workers and raised questions about Amazon’s ability to protect these employees.

However, in an aggressive campaign, the company argued that its workers had access to rewarding jobs without having to involve a union. The win leaves Amazon the freedom to treat employees on its own terms as it went on a hiring frenzy and expanded its workforce to more than 1.3 million people.

Margaret O’Mara, a professor at the University of Washington who studies the history of tech companies, said Amazon’s message of offering good jobs with good wages won over criticism from the union and its supporters. The result, she said, “reads as a justification.”

She added that while the elections were just a warehouse, they had attracted so much attention that they had become a “brawl.” Amazon’s victory likely led organized workers to think “maybe it is not worth trying other places,” Ms. O’Mara said.

The retail, wholesale and department stores union that spearheaded the campaign blamed Amazon’s anti-union tactics before and during the vote, which ran from early February to late last month. The union said it would question the election results and call on federal labor officials to investigate Amazon in an attempt to create “an atmosphere of confusion, coercion and / or fear of reprisal”.

“Our system is broken,” said Stuart Appelbaum, the union’s president. “Amazon took full advantage of that.”

Amazon said in a statement that “the union will say that Amazon won this election because we intimidated employees, but that is not true.” It added, “Amazon did not win – our employees made the decision to vote against joining a union.”

About 50 percent of the 5,805 eligible voters in the camp cast ballots in the elections. A majority of 1,521 votes was required to win. About 500 ballot papers were mostly contested by Amazon, the union said. These ballot papers were not counted.

William and Lavonette Stokes, who started working at the Bessemer camp in July, said the union had not convinced them how to improve their working conditions. Amazon already offers good performance, relatively high pay starting at $ 15 an hour, and opportunities for advancement, said the couple, who have five children.

“Amazon is the only job I know of where they pay for your health insurance from day one,” said Ms. Stokes, 52. She added that she was put off by how organizers tried to view the union action as an extension of the Black Lives Matter movement as most of the workers are black.

“This wasn’t an African American problem,” said Ms. Stokes, who is black. “I think you can work there comfortably without being bothered.”

The vote could lead to a rethinking of strategy within the labor movement.

For years, union organizers have tried to use growing concerns about low-wage workers to break into Amazon. The retail, wholesale and department store unions had addressed critical issues related to supporting key black workers in the pandemic. The union had estimated that 85 percent of the workers in the Bessemer camp were black.

The inability to organize the warehouse also follows decades of unsuccessful and costly attempts to form unions at Walmart, the only American company that employs more people than Amazon. The repeated failures in two large companies could lead labor organizers to focus more on supporting national policies, such as a higher federal minimum wage, than on unionizing individual jobs.

The Amazon warehouse on the outskirts of Birmingham opened a year ago when the pandemic hit. It was part of a significant expansion for the company that accelerated during the pandemic. Last year, Amazon grew by more than 400,000 employees in the US, which now employs almost a million people. Warehouse workers typically assemble and package orders for items for customers.

The union efforts came together quickly, especially for someone aiming at such a big goal. A small group of workers in the Bessemer building reached out to the local retail union branch last summer. They were frustrated with the way Amazon was constantly using technology to monitor every second of their work day and felt that their managers were unwilling to listen to their complaints.

Organizers had at least 2,000 workers sign cards saying they wanted an election, enough for the National Labor Relations Board, which conducts union elections, to approve a vote.

The election was carried out by mail, a concession to the pandemic. Instead of holding elections for just a few days, workers had more than a month to fill out and send in their March 29 ballot papers.

Amazon’s public campaign focused on the company’s accomplishments and the $ 15 minimum wage, which is double the Alabama minimum wage. Internally, it was stressed that workers do not have to pay for union membership to have a good job. The company’s slogan – “Do it for free” – was conveyed to employees in text messages, mandatory meetings, and signs in toilet cubicles.

The union had complained that these tactics showed how companies like Amazon can have an advantage in holding mandatory anti-union meetings and having access to workers in the warehouse to convince them to vote no. In 2018, the union also tried and failed to gain a foothold in an Amazon warehouse on Staten Island.

Ms. O’Mara said complaints about the union about job stability and safety made it difficult for workers to organize. This is because the impermanence of warehouse jobs “counteracts solidarity and willingness to invest in this employer and this job,” she said.

Many union leaders said union formation at Amazon was critical to reversing the long-term decline in union membership, which fell from the upper teens to just over 6 percent of the private sector in the early 1980s.

They argued that Amazon had power over millions of workers in the industries in which it operated. The dominance of the company has forced its competitors to adopt their work practices, where efficiency is paramount.

“Amazon is changing the industry one by one,” said Appelbaum, president of the retail workers’ union, in an interview in 2019. “Amazon’s vision of the world is not the vision we want or can tolerate.” He has often referred to efforts to unify Amazon as a struggle for the “future of work”.

Some union leaders said the campaign in Bessemer would advance work goals, even if it ended in loss.

The election generated “a lot of coverage and discussion, and people in this country are hearing that unions are the solution,” said Sara Nelson, president of the Association of Flight Attendants. “We were able to have a real discussion about what the union is actually doing.”

Noam Scheiber, Sophia June and Miles McKinley contributed to the coverage.

Categories
Business

England collapse to T20 collection defeat to India

AHMEDABAD, INDIA – MARCH 20: Shardul Thakur of India celebrates the wicket of Jonny Bairstow of England captured by Suryakumar Yadav during the 5th T20 International between India and England at Narendra Modi Stadium on March 20, 2021 in Ahmedabad, India.

Surjeet Yadav | Getty Images Sports | Getty Images

England collapsed to a 36-run loss to India in the crucial fifth T20 international match in Ahmedabad when the home side took a 3-2 win in the series.

India scored a massive 224-2 from their 20 overs after being reinstated by Eoin Morgan, and although Dawid Malan (68 of 46 balls) and Jos Buttler (52 of 34) both fired in a century, they stand for the second wicket. England eventually collapsed in response to 188-8.

On what is undoubtedly the best club in the series, India has been aggressive from the start. The new opening pair Rohit Sharma (64 of 34 balls) and Virat Kohli (80 of 52 balls) played 94 and achieved a rate of more than 10 over.

Both went through well into the 1950s, while Suryakumar Yadav (32 of 17) and Hardik Pandya (39 of 17) stepped in late with rapid-fire cameos – the former’s innings only ended with a jaw-dropping season frontier catch from Chris Jordan.

Jason Roy (0) went to the second ball of the English chase, which was bowled cleanly by Bhuvneswhar Kumar (2-15). He later returned to win Buttler’s key wicket in a 13th that cost only three runs and turned the game in India’s favor.

Buttler’s dismissal was the first of seven wickets to fall for 44 runs as England stumbled on their way to a series defeat.

Morgan had previously been successful in the throw, and although the English skipper lost the fourth T20 on Thursday when he chased and faced a belting track, he had no hesitation in asking India again to strike first.

But a change at the top of the order for India had the desired effect. After the out of shape KL Rahul fell, Kohli set out to open up to Rohit, who had returned to his best performance in the power play.

Rohit warned both his intent and good form as he crossed two boundaries through the ceiling of Jofra Archers second and then started Adil Rashid (1-31) over the deep midwicket fence in third.

That was one of five highs in Rohit’s breathtaking stroke when India smashed 60 out of six-over power play and he ran 30 balls for up to half a century.

Ben Stokes (1-26) made for the decisive breakthrough for England and fooled Rohit for the pace with a cutter that rattled into his stumps. But any hopes that the wicket would stall the Indian innings were soon dashed when Suryakumar – fresh from firing fifty in his first T20I innings – blew Rashid and Jordan three consecutive boundaries on the next run occupied the 12th.

Jordan would take revenge with a ridiculous frontier catch only to see Suryakumar’s back not long after. He sprinted around the deep midwicket fence for an effortless one-handed catch before passing it on to the observing (and laughing in amazement) Jason Roy as Jordan’s swing led him over the rope.

Read more stories from Sky Sports

Kohli, who was happy to play second fiddle up to that point – having had only 31 deliveries by the end of the 14th – he stepped on the gas with Pandya at the back of the Indian innings.

The pair put on 78 in the last six overs, with Kohli crossing to a 28th T20I fifty and Pandya, who battled the short ball during the series, this time holding onto something that slammed halfway – the all-rounder sent two of those Deliveries from Jordan passed the distance in the 19th.

AHMEDABAD, INDIA – MARCH 20: Shardul Thakur of India (C) celebrates Chris Jordan of England’s wicket with Virat Kohli during the 5th T20 International between India and England at Narendra Modi Stadium on March 20, 2021 in Ahmedabad, India .

Surjeet Yadav | Getty Images Sports | Getty Images

In the hunt for such a stiff target, England’s innings had got off to a worst start when Roy was sent off by Bhuvneshwar for the second ball looking for the big swing to the deep Midwicket line.

Malan, his place on this English page under pressure, came out swinging and Looted 14 runs of three balls in Pandya’s second over.

Meanwhile, Butler found Rahul Chahar to his liking and smashed the leg spinner for three of his four sixes when he and Malan fired 62 off the power play en route to a good century score.

Malan raced through to a 33-ball-fifty while Buttler produced half a century of his own 30 deliveries, though then ran off with a long long-off in Bhuvneshwar’s 13th game.

This proved to be a turning point in the game. Jonny Bairstow (7), Morgan (1) and Ben Stokes (14) were all cheaply laid off when the rate required rose dramatically. Malan was one of three who fell on Shardul Thakur (3 -45).