Mitch McConnell may no longer be Senate Majority Leader, but Republicans can still block legislation supported by the vast majority. That's because of a Senate rule called the filibuster. If we have any hope of safeguarding our democracy and ushering in transformative change, Democrats must wield their power to get rid of the filibuster – and fast.

The filibuster is a Senate rule requiring a 60-vote supermajority to pass legislation. Which means a minority of senators can often block legislation that the vast majority of Americans want and need.

It's not in the Constitution. In fact, it's arguably unconstitutional. Alexander Hamilton regarded a supermajority rule as "a poison" that would lead to "contemptible compromises of the public good."

Even without the filibuster, Senate Republicans already have outsized influence. The 50 of them represent 41 and a half million fewer Americans than the 50 Senate Democrats. Wyoming, with 579,000 people gets two senators. California, with 40 million also gets two senators.

The Senate Rule Breaking Our Politics www.youtube.com

Meanwhile, Republican-controlled states are gearing up to pass even more restrictive voting laws along with additional partisan gerrymandering that could enable Republicans in Washington to maintain power for the next decade.

The best way to prevent this is with national election standards through the For the People Act and the John Lewis Voting Rights Act – but these important bills are stymied as long as the filibuster remains in place.

The filibuster is rooted in racism. In the late 19th century, Southern senators crafted the "talking filibuster" – in which a member could delay the passage of a bill with a long-winded speech – in order to protect the pro-slavery Senate minority.

The current version of the filibuster, requiring 60 votes to end debate, was popularized in the Jim Crow era by Southern senators seeking to prevent passage of civil rights legislation. From the end of Reconstruction to 1964, the filibuster was used only to kill civil rights bills.

Senators can now use a process called "reconciliation" to pass legislation on budgetary matters, requiring a bare majority of 51 votes. But the filibuster can still stop bills on voting rights, the climate crisis, campaign finance reform, and other crucial legislation Americans need – and on which Joe Biden has based much of his presidency.

Getting rid of the filibuster is also good politics. As long as the filibuster is intact, Senate Republicans could keep the Senate in gridlock, and then run in the 2022 midterms on Democrats' failure to get anything done.

The good news is the filibuster is a Senate rule. As I said, it's not in the Constitution. It's not even in a law. Like any other Senate rule it can be changed by a simple majority of senators.

With Vice President Kamala Harris now serving as the tie-breaking vote, Senate Democrats can and must abolish the filibuster.

There are a few conservative Senate Democrats who don't like the idea, but Joe Biden and Chuck Schumer can get them to fall in line. That's what leadership is all about. They must end the filibuster and get America moving. Now.

We have stunningly good news today: Wages in 2020 grew at by far the fastest rate in the last 45 years.

The bad news: It's a statistical anomaly caused by Donald Trump's lethal mishandling of the coronavirus pandemic. The scourge wiped out almost eight million jobs held by lower-paid workers and only two million better-paying jobs.

The worse news: Two Republican senators who publicly profess their Christian faith to win over voters want to oppress millions of people trapped in poverty. With straight faces, they call their plan the Higher Wages for American Workers Act.

The good news starts out this way—in 2020, average wages grew a stunningly robust 7.2% over the previous year.

More than 80% of the 9.6 million jobs that disappeared in the pandemic paid in the bottom quarter of wages. Wipe out those jobs and the statistics on wages show an increase.

That's by far the greatest one-year growth in wages in the past 45 years. In fact, it's 80% more than the fastest previous year's wage growth, analysis of Census data shows.

Typical Pay

The better measurement, however, is the median wage. It indicates what the typical worker makes. The median marks the halfway point in wages with half of workers making more, half less. The median wage grew 6.9%, a new report by the Economic Policy Institute shows.

EPI is a nonprofit research organization that advocates for poorly paid workers and regularly issues The State of Working America report with lots of interactive graphics. I've checked its work and always find it rock solid.

The obvious question is how could wages skyrocket during a pandemic that created the worst joblessness since the Great Depression? How could wages rise at all since by the end of May more than 42 million Americans, a quarter of those with any paid labor, had filed for jobless benefits?

Just beneath the surface, we find a compelling and distorting fact: More than 80% of the 9.6 million jobs that disappeared in the pandemic paid in the bottom quarter of wages. Wipe out those jobs and the statistics on wages show an increase. What's surprising is that the increase is only about 7%.

America's low-paid jobs are disproportionately held by women, especially those with children and little education, and by minorities. In real terms, these groups have been losing ground for years even as the economy keeps growing.

But by killing their jobs, at least until the pandemic is over and recovery is complete, the data in wages paid were distorted by the fact that most of those who are out of work were in the bottom half of the pay ladder.

Forgotten Americans Forgotten

What was it that Trump promised The Forgotten Men and Women? Oh yes, "The forgotten men and women of our country will be forgotten no longer." Well, he forgot about them and in addition to a real jobless rate of about 10% plus more than a half-million Americans needlessly dead. Had Trump followed sound public health advice, as we saw South Korea do, the coronavirus butcher's bill would be only about 10,000 dead Americans.

So how to alleviate the misery of America's working poor?

Senators Mitt Romney (R-Utah) and Tom Cotton (R-Ark.) say they are coming to the rescue. In a display of chutzpah and cluelessness that is extraordinary even for rich white men in high government positions, they call their bill the Higher Wages for American Workers Act.

Their bill's provisions are at odds with their professed devotion to a religion that imposes as a core duty alleviating the suffering of the poor. Cotton is a Methodist. Romney belongs to the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

Cotton and Romney say the Biden administration plan for a $15 minimum wage in 2025 is way too much money. They propose a minimum wage of $10 an hour in 2025.

How much higher would real wages rise under the Cotton-Romney plan?

$12 A Week

Given the expected rate of inflation, that $10 an hour in 2025 would mean about 30-cents more in real pay than the current federal minimum of $7.25 an hour. That's $12 a week more for a full-time week. The current minimum wage has been in place since 2009 under legislation signed by President George W. Bush. Inflation since 2009 has shaved roughly a buck off each hour's minimum wage.

Measured back to President George W. Bush, the Cotton-Romney plan leaves workers worse off in 2025 than in 2009.

Now watch the news and see if the record rise in median and average wages is reported. Where it is, pay close attention—especially in reports by Fox News and its like—whether they say the increase is a statistical anomaly or proclaim a miracle wrought by Trump.

Having read this at least you won't be fooled.

With the possibility of getting a more straightforward $15 federal minimum wage increase passed under the reconciliation process as part of the Covid-19 relief package in the U.S. Senate now in doubt, Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) is working on an alternative tax proposal as a way to make sure the nation's largest corporations don't continue to pay their employees what he describes as "starvation wages."Calling Thursday's guidance by the Senate Parliamentarian that the $15 wage increase should not be included in the Senate's version of the bill a "setback," Sanders told CNN's Anderson Cooper Friday night that lawmakers may "have to figure out another way to raise wages" as he referenced a Plan-B proposal of tax incentives tied to worker wages.

Asked by Cooper how he would determine which companies would face the new taxation policies, Sanders said Walmart continues to be the "poster child" when it comes to corporate greed and low-paid workers.

"This is a family that is incredibly wealthy," said Sanders of the Walton Family which owns the controlling stakes in the retail giant.

"One of their owners spend zillions of dollars on antique cars," Sanders said. "They've got mansions. They have all kinds of art collections. But somehow or another they can't pay their starting wage at more than 11 bucks an hour. The same thing for Burger King, same thing for McDonald's, same thing for Dollar General."

Just hours after Sanders interview on CNN, House Democrats early Saturday morning approved their version of a Covid-19 package with the wage increase included.

In a video posted Saturday on social media, Sanders further expanded on the issue by calling it "outrageous" that billionaires like the Walton's continue to see their massive fortunes soar during the pandemic when frontline workers and low-income families are just barely scraping by.

Following Thursday's announcement by the parliamentarian, Sanders joined with Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Wash.) to float a proposal that would strip tax deductions from corporations that fail to pay their workers a living wage and provide other incentives to help small businesses make sure they can pay their employees at least $15 per hour.

As the Washington Post's Jeff Stein and Erica Werner report Saturday, Sanders and Wyden are among the top Democrats "trying to find a backup plan to a minimum-wage increase" by "exploring new tax penalties on firms with more than $2.5 billion in gross receipts that do not pay at least $15 an hour."

According to the reporting:

The measure, which aides cautioned was still under discussion and subject to change, would aim to levy a 5 percent annual tax on these large corporations if they pay below $15 an hour, according to the two people, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to share details of private deliberations. Democrats might aim to ratchet up the 5 percent penalty over time for large firms that do not increase their wages, although that measure is also preliminary and could change, the people said.
The plan being discussed would overwhelmingly hit companies in the Fortune 1000, many of which have seen record profits during the pandemic. The penalty would likely start almost immediately after the law is passed.

"It is cold comfort to know that majority support for raising the minimum wage could be meaningless because of arcane Senate rules," said Wyden, referencing the parliamentarian's guideance on Thursday. "We couldn't get in the front door or the back door, so we'll try to go through the window."

While Sanders himself suggested the Plan-B effort was only necessary because the more straightforward pathway may be blocked, critics say the more complicated route to increased wages may fair little better in terms of making its way through the Senate and simply having Vice President Kamala Harris overrule or disregard the parliamentarian's guidance would be the better and easier path.

Mark Weisbrot, co-director of the Center for Economic and Policy Research, told the Post it would be "impossible" to adequately monitor corporations to make sure they pay at rates that aren't mandated by the federal minimum wage statute.

"Anybody who wants to pay less than $15 under these alternatives will do it," warned Weisbrot.

"So it's not going to do the job," he said. "Democrats should just overrule the Senate parliamentarian."