This report was written by Andrew Perez and David Sirota.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n On Thursday, a key Senate official advised<\/a> Democratic lawmakers that the chamber\u2019s rules do not allow them to include a minimum wage increase in President Joe Biden\u2019s first COVID-19 relief legislation. The ruling from the parliamentarian means that Vice President Kamala Harris could decide the fate of one of the Democratic Party\u2019s most significant campaign promises \u2014 but it remains unclear what she will end up doing.<\/p>\n\n\n\n As the presiding officer of the Senate, Harris \u2014 who has long touted her support for a $15 minimum wage<\/a> \u2014 can now use the power her predecessors have used to ignore the advisory opinion and fulfill Biden\u2019s campaign promise to boost the wage. A confidential memo obtained by The Daily Poster <\/em>now circulating on Capitol Hill spells out exactly how that could be accomplished.<\/p>\n\n\n\n However, White House chief of staff Ron Klain this week declared that Harris will refuse to use that power \u2014 a decision that would effectively put the Biden-Harris administration in the position of potentially killing the prospect of minimum wage legislation for the foreseeable future. Immediately after the parliamentarian\u2019s ruling, the White House issued a statement reiterating Klain\u2019s comment, declaring<\/a> that \u201cBiden respects the parliamentarian\u2019s decision.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n Some congressional Democrats have already been arguing that the Biden administration\u2019s refusal to overrule the parliamentarian would be immoral and a political disaster for their party.<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cIt’s been 12 years since we\u2019ve raised the minimum wage, and if we\u2019re going to make those promises, we have to be able to deliver on them,\u201d Rep. Pramila Jayapal said<\/a> Wednesday on MSNBC. \u201cBecause, I’ll tell you what, in two years… when people vote in the midterms, you\u2019re not gonna be able to say, \u2018Well, I\u2019m sorry, we couldn\u2019t raise the minimum wage because the parliamentarian ruled that we couldn’t do it.\u2019 That’s not gonna fly.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n The maddening process conversation surrounding a $15 minimum wage increase is the result of Democrats refusing to eliminate the legislative filibuster, which means Republicans can block most legislation unless Democrats find 60 votes. <\/p>\n\n\n\n As such, Democrats are working to pass the COVID bill using the convoluted budget reconciliation process. The process will allow for a simple majority vote on the final legislation, but it also allows Senate parliamentarian Elizabeth MacDonough to recommend tossing certain provisions if she decides they violate the so-called Byrd Rule<\/a>, which is designed to prohibit extraneous matters outside of federal spending issues to be added to budget legislation. <\/p>\n\n\n\n The minimum wage, however, has budget implications, according to the Congressional Budget Office<\/a> \u2014 which is why proponents had hoped MacDonough would advise that it is in order, especially since the nonpartisan parliamentarian has previously ruled that other less significant<\/a> budget-related issues were in order. <\/p>\n\n\n\n MacDonough, however, refused to do so on Thursday evening. The development is not catastrophic for the $15 minimum wage provision \u2014 if Harris simply uses her power to ignore the opinion and clear the path for the measure she has long insisted she supports. <\/p>\n\n\n\n The problem is that the White House is signaling she will do the opposite.<\/p>\n\n\n\n In an MSNBC interview<\/a> on Wednesday, Klain said that if the parliamentarian advises Democrats against including the minimum wage hike, the White House will not want Democrats to move ahead with it. If Harris refuses to use her power, that decision could leave workers who are paid poverty wages and toiling in hazardous conditions during the pandemic to wait indefinitely for better pay. <\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cNot sure if it\u2019s ever happened in the past,\u201d Klain said when asked if Harris will ignore the parliamentarian. \u201cCertainly that\u2019s not something we would do. We\u2019re going to honor the rules of the system and work within that system to get this bill passed.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n Eugene Daniels <\/strong>@EugeneDaniels2For those saying Harris should just overrule the Senate Parliamentarian on $15 minimum wage, Chief of Staff Ron Klain told @JoyAnnReid last night that: \n\n“Certainly that’s not something we would do. We’re going to honor the rules of the Senate and work within that system.” <\/p>\n\n\n\n February 26th 202148<\/strong> Retweets186<\/strong> Likes<\/p>\n\n\n\n Vice presidents have ignored the parliamentarian in the past. According to Slate<\/a><\/em>, “Vice President Hubert Humphrey routinely ignored his parliamentarian\u2019s advice.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n Roll Call <\/em>reported last month<\/a>: \u201cPrecedents for ignoring parliamentary advice include 1967, 1969, and 1975 efforts to change the Senate’s threshold to end debate from a two-thirds vote to three-fifths.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cUltimately it\u2019s the Vice President of the United States,\u201d said former Senate parliamentarian Robert Dove in a 2010<\/a>interview<\/a> about such matters. \u201cIt is the decision of the Vice President whether or not to play a role here\u2026 And I have seen vice presidents play that role in other very important situations\u2026 The parliamentarian can only advise. It is the vice president who rules.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n At the time, The Huffington Post<\/em> explained that a vice president \u201ccan choose whether or not to accept the parliamentarian\u2019s decision or rule\u2026 that ruling is subject to appeal \u2014 but the appeal is decided by majority vote.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n In a new memo circulating to lawmakers and obtained by The Daily Poster<\/em>, Harris\u2019s power as the presiding Chair of the Senate is spelled out, citing a precedent set during the Clinton administration. <\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cIt would take 60 votes to overturn the ruling of the Chair on a Byrd Rule point of order, regardless of what the Parliamentarian advises,\u201d states the memo. \u201cBased on a search of the Congressional Record, it appears that only twice has the chair\u2019s ruling on a Byrd Rule point of order been appealed. Both instances occurred on August 6, 1993<\/a>, during consideration of the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1993. Neither appeal garnered the 60 affirmative votes necessary to overturn the Chair\u2019s ruling.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n The memo spells out exactly how Democrats could use the same process now, explaining the scenario that would play out if Harris invoked her power:<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cWhat would probably happen is a senator would appeal the ruling of the chair and then the full Senate would vote on whether to sustain the appeal,\u201d it says. \u201cThe Chair\u2019s ruling would be upheld as long as there are not 60 affirmative votes to sustain the appeal. So, if the majority could hold enough members together (less than 60 affirmative votes to sustain the appeal), the ruling that runs counter to the Parliamentarian\u2019s advice would be upheld.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n The same memo also warns against Harris accepting the parliamentarian\u2019s advice and Senate Democrats then pretending to push for the new minimum wage as part of the deliberations. In that situation, the memo suggests Democrats would be setting the minimum wage measure up for defeat. <\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cIf in the same scenario, the chair followed<\/em> the parliamentarian\u2019s advice (and) a senator from the majority party (in favor of the provision at issue) were to appeal that ruling, then it would also take 60 affirmative votes to overturn the chair\u2019s ruling,\u201d says the memo. \u201cThus, the majority would be in a weaker position by doing it this way, because they would need to muster 60 affirmative votes to overturn the chair.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n Biden\u2019s \u201cAmerican Rescue Plan,\u201d released<\/a> on Biden\u2019s first day in office, called on Congress to raise the minimum wage in its COVID relief bill. <\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cThroughout the pandemic, millions of American workers have put their lives on the line to keep their communities and country functioning, including the 40 percent of frontline workers who are people of color,\u201d his plan stated. \u201cAs President Biden has said, let\u2019s not just praise them, let\u2019s pay them.<\/p>\n\n\n\n But for weeks now, it\u2019s seemed like Biden and his fellow Democrats were actively hoping the parliamentarian would give them a halfway plausible reason to avoid including the minimum wage in the COVID bill. Indeed, last week, Biden suggested<\/a> in a meeting with governors and mayors he didn\u2019t think the Senate parliamentarian would allow the wage increase to remain in the bill. <\/p>\n\n\n\n If you watched White House chief of staff Ron Klain\u2019s appearance on MSNBC on Wednesday, it was abundantly clear that he and his colleagues do not view securing the minimum wage hike in the COVID legislation as a priority. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Instead, Klain went to the mat to defend Biden\u2019s scandal<\/a>–plagued<\/a> Office of Management and Budget nominee Neera Tanden, who probably won\u2019t have the votes to win confirmation after Sen. Joe Manchin (D-W.Va<\/a>.) announced he\u2019ll oppose her.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Klain said, \u201cWe’re fighting our guts out to get her confirmed.\u201d He added: \u201cIf Neera Tanden is not confirmed, she will not become the budget director. We will find some other place for her to serve in the administration that doesn\u2019t require senate confirmation.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n The contrast could not be more stark: The Biden administration appears to be pulling out all the stops to confirm a Washington insider to a relatively obscure position, but not doing the same to fight for a policy that polls show is wildly popular and that economic data suggests is desperately needed now more than ever.<\/p>\n\n\n\n According to a recent study<\/a> by the U.S. Congressional Budget Office, raising the minimum wage to $15 could affect the wages of 27 million U.S. workers. Earlier this week, the Federal Reserve published<\/a> research showing that the current federal minimum wage of $7.25 is worth less today than it\u2019s ever been. <\/p>\n\n\n\n This abominable reality could continue for the foreseeable future if Harris now refuses to use her power to add a minimum wage increase to what could be the only piece of major legislation that could move in a gridlocked Senate.<\/p>\n\n\n\n This newsletter relies on readers pitching in to support it. If you like what you just read and want to help expand this kind of journalism, consider becoming a paid subscriber by clicking this link<\/a>.<\/strong><\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n Click here to subscribe.<\/strong><\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n Subscribe now<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" Despite a Senate official\u2019s roadblock, the VP can clear a path to fulfill Dems\u2019 $15 minimum wage promise, according to a blueprint circulating on Capitol Hill. Andrew Perez\u00a0and\u00a0David Sirota Feb 26, 2021 (The Daily Poster) This report was written by Andrew Perez and David Sirota. On Thursday, a key Senate… Continue reading \u201cUltimately It\u2019s The Vice President Of The United States\u201d<\/strong><\/h4>\n\n\n\n
![\"\"\/](\"https:\/\/ecp.yusercontent.com\/mail?url=https%3A%2F%2Fcdn.substack.com%2Fimage%2Ftwitter_name%2Fw_36%2FEugeneDaniels2.jpg&t=1614364938&ymreqid=3424e100-25d4-8d73-2f6c-fd080101a700&sig=6n3HRQIe_svQaT2SQQ31IA--~D\")
<\/figure>\n\n\n\n<\/figure>\n\n\n\n
Confidential Memo Spells Out A Path Forward<\/strong><\/h4>\n\n\n\n
Biden Has Been Retreating For Weeks<\/strong><\/h4>\n\n\n\n
\n\n\n\n