Manchin and Sinema blast Harris for wanting to kill key Senate rule to codify Roe v. Wade: 'Shame on her'

Kamala Harris recently proposed eliminating obstruction in the Senate, a fundamental rule for the function of the chamber, in order to codify Roe v. Wade and legalize abortion at the federal level. Reactions were swift and came from two of his former colleagues in the Senate, Joe Manchin and Kyrsten Sinema.

The independent senators came out separately to repudiate comments the Democratic candidate made on a Wisconsin radio station, where she made the following statement: "I think we should eliminate obstruction in the Roe case."

Harris defended on several occasions the legalization of abortion at the federal level, which contradicts Donald Trump's position, who prefers to leave the decision in the hands of voters in each state.

The first to come out at the crossroads was the former West Virginia Democrat, who spoke about it to some reporters on Capitol Hill.

"Shame on her"

"Shame on her. She knows the filibuster is the Holy Grail of democracy. It's the only thing that keeps us talking and working together. If she gets rid of that, then this would be the House on steroids," Manchin noted, who has already announced he will not seek another term in the Senate.

However, the still-senator does not believe the Democrat can succeed in removing obstruction. "That ain't going to happen. I think that basically can destroy our country and my country is more important to me than any one person or any one person's ideology," Manchin added.

As for Sinema, she chose to make her comments on her X account, where she wrote the following, "To state the supremely obvious, eliminating the filibuster to codify Roe v Wade also enables a future Congress to ban all abortion nationwide. What an absolutely terrible, shortsighted idea."

When Chuck Schumer also sought to eliminate it in 2022 to pass the Voting Rights Advancement Act by a simple majority, Manchin and Sinema were the only two Democrats who voted to keep the rule at the time.

What is obstruction in the Senate?

Unlike the House of Representatives, the Senate was designed to be a more deliberative body. Therefore, since 1806, it has taken a supermajority to end debate on a particular piece of legislation, thus allowing for a vote that operates under simple majority rules, the same as, say, half plus one.

Thus, 60 or more votes are not needed for legislation to pass in the Senate, but rather, that number of votes is required for debate on a particular piece of legislation to end and voting to begin.

This was formally regulated in 1917 in Senate Rule 22, which is referred to as the "adjournment" rule. This rule effectively ends debate on a piece of legislation and allows Senators to vote on it..