Let’s start with The Hill: Van Hollen calls to abolish Senate filibuster, rules out 2028 White House bid.
“My personal opinion is that we need democracy in the United States Senate and that means allowing ultimately a majority of senators to answer the call of the American people, so that means 51 votes,” Van Hollen said.
“My personal view has been all along that the filibuster is an antidemocratic — small ‘d’ — provision. It’s not in our Constitution. It was put in there by senators to enhance their power over the power of the people,” he added.
“My view is we need to have a system where you have lots of debate, lots of debate, but at the end of the day, a majority reflecting the will of the people should be able to hold a view on an important measure,” he said. “This is an issue that I think we need to talk to the caucus about.”
Agreed! And whether or not Van Hollen prevails, it is heartening to see the issue getting prominent treatment in this discussion.
The fact that Van Hollen is disavowing 2028 aspirations increases how seriously I take his bid, as I initially thought this was a PR stunt linked to gaining attention for a primary run (and, granted, may still be, as all public statements about presidential bids are always suspect).
The Maryland senator, who formally announced Thursday his plan to challenge Schumer in a leadership race next month, also said he’s no longer considering a run for president in 2028.
“I’m not running in 2028,” he declared.
Via Politico: Van Hollen disputes Schumer’s claim that he has the votes to stay leader.
Sen. Chris Van Hollen on Sunday accused Senate Democratic leader Chuck Schumer’s team of trying to scare Senate Democrats away from backing his bid for majority leader, pushing back on Schumer’s claim that he already has the votes to stay in charge.
[…]
Schumer’s team hasn’t released a whip list, and Schumer said in a statement Thursday that he had the votes to remain leader. Van Hollen told Fox he has the support of “about 15 and growing,” up from the more than 10 he cited Thursday.
Van Hollen also told CNN that he saw talk of moving up the Dec. 1 leadership election as a “sign of weakness” and accused Schumer’s team of seeking an earlier vote. Schumer hasn’t publicly weighed in on the timing, and a spokesperson for the senior Democrat has not immediately responded to a request for comment.
I do take with a grain of salt any assertions by Van Hollen (or Schumer) that they have the votes. Keep in mind that the vote itself will be by secret ballot, and Senators have the leeway to tell both Van Hollen and Schumer that they will vote for them (or even believe at a given moment that they will do so).
Personally, I would prefer an earlier vote to a later one. Get this over with so that the energy can be put into serious planning for the next Congress.
Senate Democrats have privately discussed holding the vote before Thanksgiving recess, as POLITICO reported Friday. One option would be for a senator to raise the issue at Tuesday’s caucus lunch. An earlier vote would require Democrats to waive caucus rules, and even some Schumer allies are skeptical it will happen.
The sooner, the better.
I continue to be skeptical that who wins matters all that much, and I suspect that Schumer is the likely winner.
For what it is worth, Van Hollen is a little younger than Schumer (although hardly representing generational change) and is a career politician, although he hasn’t been in Congress as long as Schumer. Van Hollen’s voting record is somewhat more anti-Trump than Schumer’s. Via the below Schumer has voted with Trump 7% of the time, while Van Hollen has 3% of the time (caucus average was 10%).
Meanwhile, the Democratic Senator most likely to vote with Trump (27% of the time) isn’t a Van Hollen stan: Fetterman: Naming Van Hollen majority leader ‘would be troubling’.
Sen. John Fetterman (D-Pa.) hinted that he could leave the Democratic Party if Sen. Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.) is elected as the Senate Majority Leader.
“Yeah, absolutely, it would be troubling if my caucus elects someone like Van Hollen that has really made his name being very anti … hostile to Israel,” Fetterman said when asked if there is a “red line” for him to walk away from the party, in a Fox News interview.
The good news for Democrats is: they have more than enough seats to let Fetterman do Fetterman.
