Nuke The Filibuster!

The current government shutdown, whatever else it may be, is a negotiation. Whatever rhe conventional wisdom may say about Trump's current situation, it's unwise to forget that Trump is a skilled negotiator. In the current shutdown crisis, I think he's following an established pattern. His call to nuke the filibuster is a good example. At 4:15 in the video above, he says,

I've been saying for the last 30 days, we've had four or five different points, "Yes, sir, they're going to get it right now, we should have it done in a day." I've heard that about four times. I heard it after [No] Kings. . . I heard it after a couple of other moments in time. And I said, "No, I don't believe so." And now I heard it's after the election. I don't believe so. I think they're kamikaze pilots. . . . They'll take down the country if they have to.

His argument is that the Democrats, althougn in the minority, will use the filibuster to block every Republican initiative for the rest of his term, so it's time to nuke the filibuster:

That demand is putting Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., and other GOP leaders in an awkward spot. Thune and many other senators oppose terminating the filibuster, an arcane procedural tool that empowers the minority party to delay or block a piece of legislation they oppose.

Getting rid of it would help Republicans in the short term, but many in the party have warned that getting rid of the filibuster could come back to bite them if Democrats return to power in the Senate.

Trump-'s reply is that it's only a matter of time before the Democrats retake power, when they'll certainly nuke it themselves; best do it now, when we can reap the benefit. This may seem like Trump the impulse-driven egoist is back, but I think this is a carefully thought-out strategy. Let's take another look at the business-school analysis of Trump's negotiating style that I frequently link here:

As much as Trump watches others, he is aware of being watched: “life is a performance art,” he wrote Think Like a Champion. “Understand that as a performer, you have a responsibility to your audience to perform to the best of your ability”.

. . . In addition to flaunting his ability and willingness to “walk away,” Trump the performer also anchors high – i.e., makes the first move and asks for a maximum possible value to get the most out of the negotiation. “My style of deal‐making is quite simple and straightforward. I aim very high, and then I just keep pushing and pushing and pushing to get what I’m after. Sometimes I settle for less than I sought, but in most cases I still end up with what I want”.

. . . [A]mbiguity has been an enduring part of Trump’s negotiation toolkit from his early days as a businessman to the present day as occupant of the Oval Office. Before running for president he wrote, “never let anyone know exactly where you’re coming from. Knowledge is power, so keep as much of it to yourself as possible”.

. . . The structured choice tactic is central to Trump’s coercive negotiation approach. In his use, the method has the following logic: choose my proposal, which I have promoted with bravado or, being less desperate for the deal than you are, I will walk away, ominously suggesting that significant adverse consequences could follow. “Leverage,” Trump notes in The Art of the Deal, “often requires imagination, and salesmanship”. The structured choice approach is powerful because Trump essentially narrows down the other party’s choice set to only two options: one with a clear incentive and the other with an unpredictable (potentially, devastating) threat.

What Trump is doing with the shutdown, if we put it in the context of these strategies, is anchoring high: he's asking the Republican senators to nuke the filibuster, when this is something they're unlikely to do; he knows this. On the other hand, if the shutdown goes long enough and causes enough pain, this could happen. Trump is an effective persuader. But both Republican and Democrat senators are uncomfortable with nuking the filibuster. Nuking the filibuster is the "unpredictable (potentially, devastating) threat" in Trump's structured choice.

The clear incentive on the other side is to vote for cloture, leave the filibuster in place, but end the shutdown. There's also ambiguity in play. Trump has the megalomaniac role in his repertoire, and he's playing it here. What's he going to do? But his performance isn't aimed at Schumer or Jeffries -- he's aiming at splitting away enough moderate Democrats to vote for cloture. And they clearly exist:

Top Senate Democrats say the party is working through “differences of opinions” as they scramble to find an off-ramp to a month-old partial government shutdown that is set to become the longest on record Wednesday.

Democrats emerged tight-lipped from an unusually long closed-door caucus lunch on Tuesday as they weighed options to end the shutdown while pushing to extend enhanced health insurance subsidies that are set to expire at year’s end.

. . . A bipartisan deal to end the shutdown is likely to require some Democrats to agree to reopen government without an extension of the health subsidies that has been their top demand. Senate Minority Leader Charles E. Schumer, D-N.Y., declined to discuss details of the roughly three-hour caucus lunch, saying only that “we’re exploring all the options.”

Retiring Sen. Gary Peters of Michigan, one of a small group of Democrats who have been holding informal talks with Republicans, was likewise mum on details.

The problem on the moderate Democrat side is that the longer the shutdown lasts, the less predictable are the results. Meanwhile, Trump is clearly displaying a lack of concern over how long the shutdown lasts -- as he said in the video, people keep telling him it will end soon, but he doesn't think so. The Democrats want to be kamikaze pilots, but right now, there's nothing he can do about it short of nuking the filibuster, which is up to the Senate -- and which they won't do.

So the filibuster goes on, and Trump is going to let it happen -- or in other words, he's willing to walk away. There's a clear choice, on the other hand, to end the resulting ambiguity.

All I can say for sure is that it's a mistake to underestimate Trump