When Mitch McConnell was negotiating Senate rules with Chuck Schumer, he paved the way for a rule change putting the filibuster at risk. However, CNN is saying that some Democrats in a 50-50 Senate, with Kamala Harris as the deciding vote, are not necessarily prepared to open the floodgates to transform America into another country entirely.

Democrats are proposing an extraordinarily radical agenda, one that envisions permanent power in a one-party state. H.R. 1 will amend voting rules to impose nationwide the same fraud-promoting rules that put Biden into the White House: unlimited absentee ballots, ballot harvesting, drop-boxes, no voter ID, voting up to 10 days after the election, etc.

The legislation is probably unconstitutional in significant part because the Constitution gives the states the authority to make voting rules. That, after all, was part of the power-sharing of federalism.

However, the fact that something is unconstitutional doesn’t matter in the America of the Democrats’ imagining. The Supreme Court’s conservative justices and the squishes can either get with the leftist idea of a living Constitution (which means no Constitution at all) or they can watch Congress vote to expand the number of Supreme Court justices to maintain a perpetual leftist majority. That means more like Justice Sotomayor and fewer like Justices Thomas and Alito.

Democrats are also planning to add Puerto Rico and the District of Columbia – both heavily Democrat -- as states. The fact that D.C. cannot become a state under the Constitution is, again, irrelevant, for the above reasons.

Once the Democrats have their systems in place, the sky’s the limit. Fully socialized medicine, fully socialized housing, unlimited taxes on the middle and working classes, the end of the Second Amendment, social credit systems of the type seen in China, whites relegated to second class citizenship through the permanent elevation of Critical Race Theory, and more – let your imagination run wild, and they can do it.

What’s currently stopping the Democrats is the filibuster. Under the filibuster, which has existed since 1806, the minority can insist that 60 votes, not 51 (and Kamala Harris will always be the 51st vote), are necessary to pass a controversial bill. As Joe Biden explained in 2005,

At its core ... the filibuster’s not about stopping a nominee or a bill. It’s about compromise and moderation. That’s why the Founders put unlimited debate in. ... It means you may have to compromise. ... That’s what it's about: Engendering compromise and moderation.

Ladies and gentlemen, the nuclear option extinguishes the power of independence and moderates in this senate. 

Unfortunately, in January, when McConnell negotiated Senate rules with Schumer, he agreed to Schumer’s proposal of an equal power-sharing agreement provided that ditching the filibuster was up for grabs. McConnell said yes, believing that Sen. Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.) and Kyrsten Sinema (D-Ariz.) would not agree to overthrow the filibuster.  Sinema’s a maverick but Manchin is about as sturdy as an overboiled noodle – plus, Biden just bribed Manchin by appointing his wife to a committee she wanted.

CNN, however, is reporting that there are other Democrats uncomfortable with overthrowing a 215-year-old tradition:

The push by liberal Democrats to enact President Joe Biden’s sweeping agenda is running into problems beyond just Sen. Joe Manchin: A handful of Democrats are not falling in line and could limit the scope of the party’s ambitions on an array of critical issues.

Some Senate Democrats like Sen. Jon Tester of Montana are not yet sold on the House-passed bills to expand background checks on gun sales. Eight Democrats are resisting calls to raise the federal minimum wage to $15 an hour.

And it’s more than just Manchin and Arizona Sen. Kyrsten Sinema who are opposed to changing Senate rules so a filibuster can be defeated by 51 votes, rather than 60: The two New Hampshire Democratic senators are resisting those calls as well, in addition to several others who are not yet persuaded that such a change is necessary.

“No,” Sen. Jeanne Shaheen, a New Hampshire Democrat, told CNN when asked if she would support eliminating the 60-vote threshold. “I think we should look at ways to reform the filibuster, but I don’t think getting rid of it is the best approach.”

New Hampshire’s junior Democratic senator, Maggie Hassan, who faces a tough reelection bid next year, also has “concerns about eliminating the filibuster,” a spokesperson said, though backs some reforms.

I don’t trust CNN’s reporting, and I worry about Shaheen’s desire to “reform the filibuster,” but it’s possible that Democrat senators from more conservative states are feeling the heat. If you have one of those senators, please contact him or her and politely inform him that Joe was right in 2005, that the Democrats do not have a massive mandate, and that moderation and compromise are the way to go in America.

IMAGE: United States Capitol by Quick PS on Unsplash.