Nate Cohn

Nate Cohn @Nate_Cohn

@jessewegman @ThePlumLineGS i think there's a chance democrats now try this approach. maybe it'll work, though i do think the chances are less than if it had happened in january. but maybe its failure can still persuade manchin on the filibuster route — PolitiTweet.org

Nate Cohn @Nate_Cohn

@jessewegman @ThePlumLineGS if it fails, you're back at square one and you hope manchin ditches the filibuster. but this time you at least hope you have a credible pitch to manchin--you hope that the failure of your serious effort persuades him that the only option is to eliminate the filibuster — PolitiTweet.org

Nate Cohn @Nate_Cohn

@jessewegman @ThePlumLineGS would that effort succeed? i wouldn't 100% rule it out; it's untested and i do think the GOP has some interests that the democrats can actually accomodate in the 'integrity' space. but more likely it fails, like most serious efforts. — PolitiTweet.org

Nate Cohn @Nate_Cohn

@jessewegman @ThePlumLineGS i think that a serious effort to pass legislation in 2021 would have started in 2021, and followed the same boring path as all of the other serious--but often unsuccessful efforts--to become law: taking a jab at building a coalition for 60 votes, likely on a narrow bill — PolitiTweet.org

Nate Cohn @Nate_Cohn

@ThePlumLineGS the great filibuster paradox is that the guy who you need to eliminate the filibuster wants you to take a bipartisan approach. so all roads to passage, whether the old fashioned way or through gutting the filibuster, start with an earnest effort at 60 votes — PolitiTweet.org

Nate Cohn @Nate_Cohn

@jpanzer everyone? no one is prioritizing or thinking about subversion, so no one thinks to include or demands the inclusion of the one subversion provision — PolitiTweet.org

Nate Cohn @Nate_Cohn

@jpanzer no it's quite consistent with it--that's the sort of thing that happens when there's a total failure of prioritization and strategy — PolitiTweet.org

Nate Cohn @Nate_Cohn

@ThePlumLineGS as i said--i do think structrual biases, including gerrymandering, register on the the scale. and i do think there's room to debate likelihood v. magnitude when assessing the seriousness of a given threat. but neither constitute voter suppression, to be clear — PolitiTweet.org

Nate Cohn @Nate_Cohn

@ThePlumLineGS there's a perfectly fine case that a state with *only* in-person election day voting has done *enough* for democracy. i'm not saying that's optimal. but would even that constitute 'backslide to minority rule'? that was standard voting access up until a few years ago, after all — PolitiTweet.org

Nate Cohn @Nate_Cohn

@ThePlumLineGS take GA. it still has automatic registration, no-excuse absentee voting (even if over a narrower timeframe and with an ID requirement), weeks of early voting, and so on. it is less than before. but if we're talking 'threat to democracy' there needs to be perspective here — PolitiTweet.org

Nate Cohn @Nate_Cohn

@ThePlumLineGS yes, and i think that the scale of the erosion on voting access is minimal when judged on a scale from 'democracy' to 'backslide to minority rule.' various structural biases, otoh, register quite significantly on that scale. subversion is a simple 'game over' event — PolitiTweet.org

Nate Cohn @Nate_Cohn

@jessewegman @ThePlumLineGS i think that's a generous way to interpret it, but i don't think that's the actual history of what consideration shaped the crafting of this proposal, and i think it shows: the roads from here start from scratch, not by narrowing it — PolitiTweet.org

Nate Cohn @Nate_Cohn

@ThePlumLineGS but regardless of the meaning of democratic backsliding, you're definitely right that i do not think that the kinds of *suppression* laws under consideration, like restricting mail voting, are the urgent threat to democracy, even if they're plainly undemocratic — PolitiTweet.org

Nate Cohn @Nate_Cohn

@ThePlumLineGS i don't think that's the definition of democratic backsliding (subversion is absolutely a form of backsliding, and a more serious one at that). — PolitiTweet.org

Nate Cohn @Nate_Cohn

@ThePlumLineGS i don't go after people's motives, but if i did i could *certainly* go and insist that everyone who disagrees with hasen must not take the threat to democracy seriously, since they're content to push a DOA messaging bill rather than try and safeguard democracy — PolitiTweet.org

Nate Cohn @Nate_Cohn

@ThePlumLineGS uh or alternately, i take the threat to democracy seriously enough that i think it merits 1) a bill targeted at the urgent threats; 2) isn't DOA — PolitiTweet.org

Nate Cohn @Nate_Cohn

@ThePlumLineGS he can speak for himself if he thinks i'm misinterpreting it. happy to clarify. but he RT'd that same tweet, and i think the plain interpretation of what he's saying is that subversion is more urgent, and congress should have focused on it > HR1 https://t.co/yHiO1d6A1h — PolitiTweet.org

Nate Cohn @Nate_Cohn

One interesting question in my replies yesterday is whether the HR1 push made it harder to pass something focused on subversion. It's hard to prove, of course, but I'd guess it did significantly narrow the path for a subversion bill — PolitiTweet.org

Nate Cohn @Nate_Cohn

He has two main proposals on the subversion front: reforming the Electoral Count Act and requiring paper ballots. In theory, there's no reason these kind of proposals couldn't/wouldn't attract some Republican support, though pulling it off IRL is a very different story ofc — PolitiTweet.org

Nate Cohn @Nate_Cohn

An interesting @rickhasen with @IChotiner on next steps for voting rights, with Hasen arguing for focus on the more urgent issue of election subversion and lamenting the focus on HR1 https://t.co/SoMxOpmQqN — PolitiTweet.org

Nate Cohn @Nate_Cohn

@hakeemjefferson @JakeMGrumbach @jon_m_rob @jbview @BrendanNyhan @gelliottmorris @mattyglesias @rickhasen to be clear, the object of Jake’s tweet is the senate. There was no serious push by leadership; no effort to make law. Activists otoh can be very serious with ideas that have no chance of passage, even tho it may sometimes be in their interest to push viable plans (like here IMO) — PolitiTweet.org

Nate Cohn @Nate_Cohn

@JakeMGrumbach @jon_m_rob @jbview @hakeemjefferson @BrendanNyhan @gelliottmorris @mattyglesias @rickhasen the implication of all of this, though, is the failure of activists to push something even remotely in the ballpark means that they may have choked on the opportunity to push something more feasible. and my gf is making me promise this is my last tweet of the evening lol — PolitiTweet.org

Nate Cohn @Nate_Cohn

@JakeMGrumbach @jon_m_rob @jbview @hakeemjefferson @BrendanNyhan @gelliottmorris @mattyglesias @rickhasen and similarly, because none of the drive for this legislation is actually coming from *in* the senate, there will be no one who picks up the effort to try and find a narrower solution — PolitiTweet.org

Nate Cohn @Nate_Cohn

@JakeMGrumbach @jon_m_rob @jbview @hakeemjefferson @BrendanNyhan @gelliottmorris @mattyglesias @rickhasen thus, the only effort to this point is figuring out how to present the illusion of party unity on a show cloture vote — PolitiTweet.org

Nate Cohn @Nate_Cohn

@JakeMGrumbach @jon_m_rob @jbview @hakeemjefferson @BrendanNyhan @gelliottmorris @mattyglesias @rickhasen this is not the equivalent, for instance, of proposing a $2 trillion dollar package hoping to land at 800bn. this is like proposing $20 trillion--an ask so big that it effectively ends the conversation, with merely a humoring stand alone vote. — PolitiTweet.org

Nate Cohn @Nate_Cohn

@JakeMGrumbach @jon_m_rob @jbview @hakeemjefferson @BrendanNyhan @gelliottmorris @mattyglesias @rickhasen there's a slightly more complicated story that fits the evidence better: there is simply no serious effort at all, but merely an attempt to appease activists who want something so self-evidently unrealistic that there's no natural path from their demand to a plausible alternative — PolitiTweet.org

Nate Cohn @Nate_Cohn

@jbview @hakeemjefferson @BrendanNyhan @jon_m_rob @gelliottmorris @mattyglesias @rickhasen He did say it was bad, let’s try JLVRA. But he’s not the one pushing this — PolitiTweet.org

Nate Cohn @Nate_Cohn

@jbview @hakeemjefferson @BrendanNyhan @jon_m_rob @gelliottmorris @mattyglesias @rickhasen And I don’t see how you intice the GOP to talk with you about a bill like HR1. It’s like pushing the GND and crying where are the republicans on climate. Maybe they’re not there! But you’re not proving it this way — PolitiTweet.org

Nate Cohn @Nate_Cohn

@jbview @hakeemjefferson @BrendanNyhan @jon_m_rob @gelliottmorris @mattyglesias @rickhasen your answer is manchin. but he decided to draft his own option, at the last second, as a way to placate activists who were upset that he was against HR1. to me, that implies that HR1 was a blocking factor — PolitiTweet.org

Nate Cohn @Nate_Cohn

@jbview @hakeemjefferson @BrendanNyhan @jon_m_rob @gelliottmorris @mattyglesias @rickhasen of course there aren't negotiations. there was already a bill: HR1. it was a million miles from a credible basis for a deal. exactly who at that point is supposed to say 'let's get the gang together' — PolitiTweet.org