周三晚上，参议院未能改变阻挠议事规则，允许投票权立法以简单多数通过。

规则的改变需要51票才能通过，但没有得到所有民主党人的支持，他们的领袖推动了这一改变。弗吉尼亚州民主党参议员乔·曼钦(Joe Manchin)和亚利桑那州民主党参议员基尔斯顿·西内马(Kyrsten Sinema)与所有共和党人一起反对这一变化。

少数党领袖米奇·麦康奈尔在投票前表示，参议院将被反对派“拯救”。

麦康奈尔说:“今晚，几乎整个政党将有史以来第一次用永久的墨水书写，他们将为短期权力粉碎参议院的灵魂。“但本机构勇敢的两党多数即将阻止他们。”

乔·拜登总统在失败后的一份声明中说:“我对参议院未能捍卫我们的民主深感失望。我很失望，但我没有被吓倒。我们将继续推进必要的立法，推动参议院程序改革，保护基本投票权。”

当晚早些时候，参议院未能结束关于投票权立法的辩论——这需要60票才能最终通过。

投票结果是49比51。

“这是关于基本的投票自由，以及什么应该是不受限制的投票。我在这里发表一个非常强烈的声明，这就是:无论今晚投票的结果如何，总统和我都不会在这个问题上放弃，这是我们民主的基础，是不容谈判的，”副总统卡玛拉·哈里斯在第一次投票后说。

在一次罕见的事件中，参议院于周三上午召开会议，所有民主党人都被指示坐在会议厅内的座位上，努力向前迈进投票权立法以及对参议院长期统治的挑战。

参议员拉斐尔·沃诺克。，是投票开始前最后发言的人之一。

“1月6日发生了，但事情是这样的，1月5日也发生了。佐治亚州是旧邦联中的一个州，它一下子就把一个黑人和一个犹太人送到了参议院，”他说。“我们的国家一直有着复杂的历史，我向你们承认，这就是我们的现状——我们正从道德困境中摇摆。我们在1月5日到1月6日之间的某个时间被抓到了。在我们的希望和恐惧之间。偏执和热爱的社区之间。每时每刻，我们人民都必须决定我们要走哪条路，为了到达那里，我们愿意牺牲什么。今天的问题是，我们会向暴力袭击屈服吗?暴力袭击的目的现在是通过州立法机构的党派选民压制法来实现的。”

参议院多数党领袖查克·舒默(Chuck Schumer)周二表示，民主党人将寻求对阻挠议事规则进行修改，以通过投票权立法，用老式的“会说话的阻挠议事”取代打破阻挠议事所需的60票门槛。

“我们的感觉很简单:在投票权这样重要的事情上，如果参议院共和党人反对，他们就不应该被允许坐在办公室里，”舒默在周二晚上的核心小组会议后说。“他们必须站出来捍卫他们对投票权的反对，投票权是我们民主的源泉。我们的核心小组对此有着广泛而强烈的感觉。”

“历史的眼睛在看着我们，”他在周三的公开辩论中说，先发制人地为这一努力辩护，认为这是道德上的胜利，如果不是立法上的胜利。“无论输赢或平局，我们都要投票，尤其是当这个问题涉及到跳动的民主之心时。”

舒默在演讲中直接点名了麦康奈尔，麦康奈尔在过去一年中五次领导他的政党阻止民主党的选举改革努力，抨击他谎称红色州没有改变限制选民准入的法律。

舒默说:“就像唐纳德·特朗普有他的“大谎言”一样，米奇·麦康奈尔现在也有他的谎言:各州没有试图压制选民。

他还对两位民主党参议员发表了讲话，他们持有舒默认为的错误观点，即众议院的阻挠议事会带来更大的两党合作，他在讲话中反驳道:“保护投票权——这种民主最根本的源泉——难道不更重要吗?”

麦康奈尔在另一次言辞激烈的演讲中表示，规则的改变将“摧毁参议院”，并警告称，如果民主党人得逞，并“炸毁”众议院通过投票权立法的规则，那将是一个“核冬天”，他称之为“党派弗兰肯斯坦法案”

“这正是这位总统承诺否认的那种有毒的世界观，但正是这种世界观在他的任期内吞噬了他的政党，”麦康奈尔在对乔·拜登总统痛击的基础上说。

麦康奈尔指责民主党试图“粉碎和攫取尽可能多的短期权力”，并表示，“对于这两个参议员群体来说，这次投票将会代代相传。”

当多数党鞭打参议员迪克·德宾时。，试图在麦康奈尔演讲后问他一个问题并让他就这个问题进行辩论，这位共和党领袖走开了。

“很抱歉他没有留下来回答这个问题，”杜宾对会议厅说。“他真的相信在19个州的行动中没有压制选民的证据吗?”

民主党的选举改革法案出台之际，19个州在2020年大选后因虚假主张而限制了投票无党派的布伦南正义中心。手头的法案将使选举日成为联邦假日，扩大提前投票和邮寄投票，并给予联邦政府对州选举更大的监督。

舒默提议在这个问题上恢复口头阻挠，这将允许民主党颠覆共和党的阻挠，为法案的最终通过让路。

根据一项谈话阻挠议案，参议员们被要求在辩论中“保持发言权”，在他们站着发言阻止议案时测试他们的耐力。一旦一个政党失去了动力，众议院就会通过以简单多数通过的法案。因此，理论上，哈里斯作为参议院主席，将成为民主党通过这项一度受阻的法案的决定性一票。

但曼钦和西内马都一再明确表示反对改变阻挠议事规则，即使是为了通过投票权，尽管他们表示支持潜在的立法。

“我不知道你是如何打破规则来制定规则的，”曼钦周二对记者说，他否决了拟议中的谈话阻挠议事。

曼钦在周三晚上的一次发言中为投票反对修改参议院规则的决定进行了辩护，他说，这一决定旨在“反驳我认为参议院民主党人对美国人民的极大误导”。

“消除阻挠议事将是简单的出路。这并不容易，”曼钦说。“我不能支持这个国家走这样一条危险的道路，当选的领导人被派往华盛顿是为了团结我们的国家，而不是分裂我们的国家。我们被称为美国，而不是分裂的州，把政治和党派放在一边是我们应该做的。”

曼钦再次呼吁两党合作，并表示他相信，如果议员们共同努力，选举改革可以以两党合作的方式实现。

曼钦说:“我不知道过去的美好时光发生了什么，但我可以告诉你，他们现在不在这里了。

这位西弗吉尼亚州议员表示，他尊重许多民主党人在阻挠议事上的立场，并要求他的坚定反对者给予尊重。

伯尼·桑德斯参议员。然而，周三晚上，曼钦和西内马被打下。

“我不明白为什么两位民主党人不准备改变规则，以便该法案能够真正成为法律，他们大概理解《投票自由法》的重要性，而且据我所知，他们将投票支持《投票自由法》。我不明白，”他说。“如果你认为这项法案有意义，如果你担心美国民主的未来，如果你准备投票支持这项法案，那你为什么浪费每个人的时间，不投票支持允许我们通过这项法案的规则变化?你知道，这就像邀请某人共进午餐，然后大张旗鼓地说你不能吃。”

德鲁·安格雷尔/盖蒂图像公司

参议员基尔斯顿·西内马走到参议院会议厅就投票权立法进行辩论..

一般来说，在辩论开始时，参议员很少占据会议厅，只有那些希望发言的人才能在一个基本上空无一人的房间里发表讲话，但周三的高风险对决并非如此。

发言的人中有得克萨斯州的共和党参议员约翰·科宁，他警告民主党人说，他们正走上“滑坡”，试图为阻挠议案通过开辟一个例外，以通过一项立法。

“他们很快就会发现自己后悔自己的政党搞垮参议院的那一天，”他说。“下一届共和党控制的参议院可以使2017年的减税政策永久化，确保蓝色州的百万富翁被要求缴纳公平份额的联邦税，”他继续列举了共和党的平台，包括实施为期20周的堕胎禁令，以及在全国范围内建立隐藏携带枪支的制度。

在过去的十年里，两党都支持司法提名人的阻挠议事，首先是在当时的参议院多数党领袖哈里·里德(Harry Reid)的领导下，他将司法提名人的门槛降至51票，为当时的总统巴拉克·奥巴马(Barack Obama)2013年的提名人让路。麦康奈尔在2017年担任参议院多数党领袖时，也使用了所谓的“核选项”来确认时任美国总统唐纳德·特朗普(Donald Trump)的第一位最高法院提名人尼尔·戈尔苏奇(Neil Gorsuch)

Senate fails to change filibuster rule for passage of voting rights legislation

The Senate on Wednesday night failed to change the filibuster rule to allow voting rights legislation to pass with a simple majority.

The rule change would have required 51 votes to pass but did not have the support of all Democrats, whose leader had pushed for it. Sens. Joe Manchin, D-W.Va., and Kyrsten Sinema, D-Ariz., joined all Republicans in opposing the change.

Minority Leader Mitch McConnell said prior to the vote that the Senate would be "saved" by the opposition.

"Tonight, for the first time in history almost an entire political party will write in permanent ink that they would shatter the soul of the Senate for short-term power," McConnell said. "But the brave bipartisan majority of this body is about to stop them."

President Joe Biden said in a statement following the defeat: "I am profoundly disappointed that the Senate has failed to stand up for our democracy. I am disappointed -- but I am not deterred. We will continue to advance necessary legislation and push for Senate procedural changes that will protect the fundamental right to vote."

Earlier in the evening, the Senate was unable to end debate on voting rights legislation -- something that would have required 60 votes to move toward final passage.

That vote was 49-51.

"This is about the fundamental freedom to vote and what should be an unfettered access to the ballot. I am here to make a very strong statement that this is: Whatever happens tonight in terms of the outcome of this vote the president and I are not going to give up on this issue this is fundamental to our democracy and it is non-negotiable," Vice President Kamala Harris said after the first vote.

In a rare event, the Senate convened on Wednesday morning with all Democrats instructed to be in their seats inside the chamber as they tried to move forward onvoting rights legislationand on a challenge to a longstanding Senate rule.

Sen. Raphael Warnock, D-Ga., was one of the last to speak before the voting began.

"Jan. 6 happened, but here's the thing, Jan. 5 also happened. Georgia, a state in the old confederacy, sent a Black man and a Jewish man to the Senate in one fell swoop," he said. "Our nation has always had a complicated history, and I submit to you that here's where we are -- we're swinging from a moral dilemma. We are caught somewhere between Jan. 5 and Jan. 6. Between our hopes and our fears. Between bigotry and beloved community. And in each moment we the people have to decide which way are we going to go, and what are we willing to sacrifice in order to get there. The question today is are we going to give in to a violent attack, whose aim is now being pursued through partisan voter suppression laws in state legislatures?"

Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer said Tuesday that Democrats would seek a carveout to the filibuster rule to pass voting rights legislation by replacing the current 60-vote threshold needed to break a filibuster with an old-fashioned "talking filibuster."

"We feel very simply: On something as important as voting rights, if Senate Republicans are going to oppose it, they should not be allowed to sit in their office," Schumer said Tuesday following an evening caucus meeting. "They've got to come down on the floor and defend their opposition to voting rights, the wellspring of our democracy. There's broad, strong feeling in our caucus about that."

"The eyes of history are upon us," he said to open debate Wednesday, preemptively defending the effort as a moral win, if not a legislative one. "Win, lose or draw, we are going to vote, especially when the issue relates to the beating heart of democracy."

Schumer called out McConnell directly in his speech, who has led his party to block Democrats' election reform efforts five times in the last year, blasting him for falsely claiming that red states haven't changed laws restricting voter access.

"Just as Donald Trump has his "big lie," Mitch McConnell now has his: States are not engaging in trying to suppress voters whatsoever," Schumer said.

He also addressed two Democratic senators who hold what Schumer thinks is a false view that the chamber's filibuster brings greater bipartisanship -- and he countered in his remarks: "Isn't the protection of voting rights -- the most fundamental wellspring of this democracy -- more important?"

McConnell, in another blistering speech, said a rule change would "destroy the Senate" and warned of a "nuclear winter" if Democrats get their way and "blow up" the chamber's rule to pass voting rights legislation, which he called a "partisan Frankenstein bill."

"This is exactly the kind of toxic world view that this president pledged to disavow, but it is exactly what has consumed his party on his watch," McConnell said, building on days of swipes at President Joe Biden.

McConnell accused Democrats of trying to "smash and grab as much short-term power as they can carry," and said, "For both groups of senators, this vote will echo for generations."

When Majority Whip Sen. Dick Durbin, D-Ill., tried to ask McConnell a question after his speech and get him to engage in debate on the issue, the Republican leader walked away.

"I'm sorry he did not stay for the question," Durbin said to the chamber. "Does he really believe that there is no evidence of voter suppression in the actions of 19 states?"

Democrats' election reform bill comes at a time when 19 states have restricted access to voting fueled by false claims in the wake of the 2020 election, according to thethe nonpartisan Brennan Center for Justice. The bill at hand would make Election Day a federal holiday, expand early voting and mail-in-voting, and give the federal government greater oversight over state elections.

Schumer has proposal to reverting to a talking filibuster on the issue would allow Democrats to subvert GOP obstruction to make way for the bill's final passage.

Under a talking filibuster, senators are required to "hold the floor" during debate, testing their stamina as they stand and speak to block bills. Once a party runs out of steam, the chamber would then pass the bill that was filibustered by a simple majority. So, in theory, Harris, as president of the Senate, would serve as a tie-breaking vote for Democrats to pass the once-filibustered bill.

But both Manchin and Sinema have repeatedly made clear their opposition to changing the filibuster rule even in order to pass voting rights, although they say they support the underlying legislation.

"I don't know how you break a rule to make a rule," Manchin told reporters Tuesday, shooting down the proposed talking filibuster.

Manchin defended his decision to vote against changing Senate rules in a floor speech Wednesday evening that he said aimed to "rebut what I believe is a great misleading of the American people" by Senate Democrats.

"Eliminating the filibuster would be the easy way out. It was not meant to be easy," Manchin said. "I cannot support such a perilous course for this nation when elected leaders are sent to Washington to unite our country not to divide our country. We are called the United States, not the divided states, and putting politics and party aside is what we are supposed to do."

Manchin made another plea for bipartisan cooperation and said he believes election reform could be achieved in a bipartisan fashion if members worked at it.

"I don't know what happened to the good old days but I can tell you they're not here now," Manchin said.

The West Virginia lawmaker said he respects that many Democrats have migrated in their stance on the filibuster and asked for respect in his steadfast opposition.

Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., however, laid into Manchin and Sinema Wednesday evening.

"I do not understand why two Democrats who presumably understand the importance of the Freedom to Vote Act, and as I understand it, will vote for the Freedom to Vote Act, are not prepared to change the rules so that that bill could actually become law. That I do not understand," he said. "If you think this bill makes sense and if you're worried about the future of American democracy and if you are prepared to vote for the bill, then why are you wasting everybody's time and not voting for the rule change that allows us to pass the bill? You know, it's like inviting somebody to lunch and putting out a great spread and saying you can't eat."

Generally, senators rarely occupy the chamber while debate is open and only those wishing to speak deliver remarks to a largely empty room -- but that was not the case for the high-stakes showdown Wednesday.

Among those who spoke was Republican Sen. John Cornyn of Texas, who warned Democrats that they're embarking on a "slippery slope" in attempting to carve out an exception to the filibuster to pass a piece of legislation.

"They'll soon find themselves rueing the day their party broke the Senate," he said. "The next Republican-controlled Senate can make the 2017 tax cuts permanent, ensure that blue state millionaires are required to pay their fair share of federal taxes," he went on, listing GOP platforms including implementing a 20-week ban on abortion and establishing concealed carry of firearms nationwide.

Both parties have supported filibuster carveouts in the past decade for judicial nominees -- first under then-Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, who lowered the threshold for judicial nominees to 51 votes to make way for then-President Barack Obama's nominees in 2013. McConnell, as Senate majority leader in 2017, also used the so-called "nuclear option" to confirm then-President Donald Trump's first Supreme Court nominee, Neil Gorsuch