Arjun Singh
In the Lever's reader -supported newsroom, this is Lever Time. I'm Arjun Singh. This week in Chicago, Democrats headed into their convention energized. Up until recently, the DNC was looking like a slow march to a political death. But then Biden dropped out, and almost overnight, it felt like the political map changed. All of that led to one of the oddest coalitions in American politics being formed. In the same week, convention delegates cheered on AOC and Elizabeth Warren.

then one of Uber's top executives and even a Republican congressman. But one group that was ever present and little seen was Corporate America. Throughout the week, viewers tuning into the convention saw several speeches promising to challenge corporate greed and break up monopolies. What the audience didn't see though was behind the cameras was a wall of private suites looking out onto the crowd. Suits filled with lobbyists and corporate executives all hoping to get a seat at the table in a new Harris administration.

That stark contrast illustrates the fork in the road Kamala Harris will be at if she wins the presidency. Will she stand with the corporate donors who financed her campaign or the grassroots Democratic base? Today on Lever Time, I'm gonna sit down with David Sirota, who spent the last week in Chicago at the DNC. We'll hear what David saw when he went behind the scenes at the convention and whether or not he thinks the Harris administration is serious about pushing forward an economic platform

that centers people over corporations.

DNC Staffer
Welcome. Good to see you all. Thank you so much for coming. So we just want to spend some time today talking about the 2024 Senate races, but also the role that we continue to see candidate.

Arjun Singh
 On Wednesday, David Sirota was at a press event held by several Democratic senators.

DNC staffer
really excited to be joined by Senator Warnock and Senator Cortez Masto and of course our chairman, Senator Gary Peters, all former bosses of mine. hopefully that doesn't get me in trouble. all of them have... These senators were some of the Democrats tasked with making sure that the Senate remains in Democratic control in 2025. And on that day, they were laying out their plan for how to do it.

Arjun Singh
Near the end of the event, David Dayen, the executive director of the American Prospect, broached an uncomfortable topic for a lot of Whether they'd be willing to do away with the filibuster, a legislative tactic that's now commonly deployed to raise the required number of votes to pass a bill from 51 senators to 60. Here's what Senator Raphael Warnock of Georgia had to say in response. 

Warnock
I just want to clarify because I was in the middle of that fight on the issue of voting.

which is the most important thing that we didn't get done in 2021. I want to clarify that actually what we were trying to do was to return the filibuster, a real filibuster. You know, the problem that we have now is that filibuster doesn't cost you anything. I call it a...

latte filibuster. You can just declare go down the street and sit down have a cup of coffee. It cost you anything. And at the end of the day on voting rights we had all we had all 50 Democrats in fact on one of those bills I believe the John Lewis bill and 48 of us were willing to embrace a filibuster reform proposal that would have exacted pain out of both sides.

Arjun Singh
perhaps tied to Senate up for weeks. But at the end of the day, you could have gotten to a vote. And so it will be interesting to see. I'm certainly deeply interested in the implications of this for getting something done as fundamental as voting rights.

if we were able to win a trifecta. What Warnock's saying is that he thinks the filibuster should return to its original form, which required a senator to stand on the floor and actually talk for hours and hours and hours, either forcing 60 of their colleagues to shut them up or wear them down in their opposition to the point that they give up and kill a bill. Today, it's institutionalized and senators can just say they're filibustering and go on with their day. That's why Warnock called it a latte filibuster.

meaning all a senator needs to do is say they're filibustering and then they're free to walk down to the coffee shop and have a latte or do whatever else they want. After the event, David Sirota caught up with Dayan to hear what he made of Warnock's response. I understand what he's trying to get at. And his point was basically you got to mean it if you're going to filibuster. And he called it the current system. What do call it? A latte filibuster? A latte filibuster where you can just go across the street and have a lot. Yeah, exactly. But I also feel like

Is that like their attempted middle ground position? Like we're not gonna get rid of the filibuster, but we're gonna make people actually stand up and do it?

you know if you did the history of this is that jeff merckley who's from oregon senator has been the strongest advocate of changing filibuster and that's really his program is he calls it the talking filibuster that you would have to hold the floor you'd have to you'd be able to pass off but only a limited number of times and at the end you would get a vote so you can make your point you couldn't you couldn't end it forever and so i suspect what

Arjun Singh
Warnock's talking about is the plan, the program of the guy who has been associated most with filibuster reform over the years. Merkley tries to resurrect that every year, and I assume he will. Again, he actually wrote a book at the beginning of the year called Filibuster, which was all about this. And it was actually an incredible book. It's kind of a must read for nerds. So I think that's what Warnock was talking about. I don't know that it's a middle

ground. mean, obviously you could just get rid of the thing. But and by the way, he's coming right this way. Here's another thing about the filibuster, too. Let's say Democrats get a full sweep and they control the House, the Senate and the White House. If they control the Senate, they probably aren't going to win 60 seats. So that means that any legislation or plans Harris is running on and going out and talking about are sure to be filibustered. Unless Senate Democrats agree to get rid of it.

Here are the Davids again talking about it.

David Dayen
doing something on the filibuster so that a majority of the Senate can pass it. She knows that. And she's saying it out loud to thousands, tens of thousands of people. Is she saying that because she sincerely is going to push to make sure everyone in the Senate goes along with this? Is she saying that because she wants to win an election? Ultimately, we're going to get an answer to all this. We might get an answer after the election, but we're going to get an answer.

I always find, last thing I'll say on this, is I always find that the promising to do something and then blaming the filibuster when you are in control of the Senate and then the political class accepting that rationale, the problem with that is part of doing your job is what I call figuring it out.

David Sirota
Right? Like, it's the politician's job. It's not my job as a reporter or it's not an activist job. It's not. It's the job of the... Like, they have one job. They make a promise and then it's your job to figure out how to make your promise a reality. It's not my job to tell you how to do that. And I think the filibuster is the most clarifying version of this.

The filibuster is the problem for the politician who's made the promise. It shouldn't be the problem for the voter demanding the politician.

fulfill the

cut spending if you needed to to balance the budget. you know, we would say we started this thing or like, what if we get a two thirds majority? And I got I never got more pushback from, you know, legislative aides and consultants and things like that than saying we should overcome that hurdle. We should get a two thirds majority. Like one guy told me Democrats will get a two thirds majority when Obama wins Alabama.

And by the way, the next year after he said that, Democrats got a two thirds majority. And I feel like they were mad about it because they didn't have any excuses left. Like the two thirds majority thing was such a great excuse for them. Like, look, the bad Republicans are the ones who are preventing us from making this progress. Now.

Dayen
they have a two -thirds majority, they can't say that anymore and it pisses them off. California, they're held accountable and it's the same thing on the federal level. It's the same thing on the federal level and so it was very important.

actually that Raphael Warnock and the others got the Senate on the record, Senate Democrats on the record a couple years ago to say we will carve out the filibuster for this thing because that was them figuring it out. They did figure it out.

And, you know, it wasn't successful because of Manchin and Cinema, but the mechanism is there. They know that it would work. So now it's just, they just got to find the votes to do it. These wonky details are often the Achilles heel of a presidential campaign. This week, Democrats wanted to throw a party. And they did. You had Lil John singing Turn Down for What during Georgia's roll call.

Arjun
Steve Kerr, the coach of the Golden State Warriors, quoting Steph Curry.

Steve Kerr
 And after the results are tallied that night, we can, in the words of great Steph Curry, we can tell Donald Trump, night night. And you saw a range of Democrats taking the stage, jubilantly extolling what they saw as the values of their party. There was AOC.

AOC
two -bit union buster thinks of himself as more of a patriot.

Arjun Singh
who offered some vague platitudes about bolstering the middle class.

The Lever (12:01.678)
with a strong and growing middle class because we know a strong middle class has always been critical to America's success and

The Lever (12:17.358)
Watching from afar, it certainly looked like a lot of fun. But call me cynical in wondering if the Democrats big tent is about to burst. How is it possible, for example, for the party's platform to be both worker centric and also cater to the corporate interests that were sponsoring much of the convention? One example of this inherent tension came in how the DNC treated Israel's continued bombardment of Gaza. In her speech, Harris tried to strike a balance.

to end this war such that Israel is secure, the hostages are released, the suffering in Gaza ends, and the Palestinian people

The Lever (13:07.7)
Members of the uncommitted movement, people who were trying to leverage the power of withholding their votes to broker a ceasefire, were denied a speaker at the event. And ultimately they were left in the wilderness of the convention's pageantry. So they emotionally sat outside the convention center, struggling to reconcile their desire for some sort of concrete action in Gaza with the party's refusal to give them a seat at the table. someone who works within the system and I was asked to make a very reasonable ask not to be suppressed.

I was asking very reasonable asks on behalf of our Palestinian siblings not to be suppressed. And the vice president's decision to suppress us is unacceptable. And so I've run out of options from my position as a delegate. And so I'm leaning into my power as a regular, everyday person and I'm sitting here and I'm not going anywhere, Roger. I'm not going anywhere. That's not to say that the speeches and words rang hollow. In fact, the speeches showed a clear shift in Democratic Party politics.

The fact that even economically conservative Democrats were talking about tackling corporate power and that Bernie Sanders received applause for railing against Citizens United, that's significant. But, and there's always this annoying but, how much can we expect to be able to accomplish? And is it possible to really find a balance between these two opposing forces, the power of billionaires and corporations and the grassroots voters at the core of the Democratic Party?

The Lever (14:33.582)
For that, I caught up with David Cerota when he was in Chicago yesterday to help answer these questions.

The Lever (14:51.47)
So are you at the Democratic National Convention right now in Chicago? I'm heading there right now. I'm going to get on the main shuttle up there. The convention's incredibly spread out. This is not a completely conducive city to a convention because there's the United Center away from the city. So everyone's on these giant shuttles. the security situations.

kind of impossible to navigate and then your credential situation. I kind of feel like this is like Democratic Party policy and governance in miniature. You know how like the Democratic Party is like obsessed with making everything complicated? Yeah, means testing everything. Yeah, it means testing everything and everything has paperwork. I mean the entire convention feels like it's like a microcosm of that, right? Like if you don't have the right badge,

You can't get to the right level and the more money you have the better badge you have to get to the right level It's just like a whole it's a whole it sounds like it's like a fucked up video game. Yeah Yeah, but it's again. It's like it's sort of perfect very on -brand for the Democratic Party Yeah, I mean what exactly happens at these conventions like I saw earlier in the week. They did the kind of cringy floor vote or the

the delegates all nominated them and like Lil Jon walked out and performed, get low. And you know, it was just this sort of weird thing. So they're nominated now, right? Like what, what are they going to do now? I feel like this event and events like this, they now kind of have a feeling of being at one of the Sunday services in the righteous gemstones.

It's incredibly gaudy and incredibly showy and it's all a giant performance and it's highly produced. And the reason I use the righteous gemstone metaphor for those who've watched that show is there is kind of a religious fervor to what's going on, to the vibe inside of the arena. It's not really a convention, it's really a rally. It's really kind of a religious ceremony where

The Lever (17:08.94)
the outcome is obviously already predetermined. But if you look closely at it, some of the contradictions and disturbing class implications about who really has the power are right there to see in plain sight at a convention like this. mean, the convention that people are seeing on TV is a television show.

The convention that people on the floor of the convention are experiencing is kind of like a feel -good rally. The convention that business groups and lobbying groups and lawmakers are experiencing is actually a business and policy transaction. And by that I mean it's a place where the lobbies that want things from the elected government

can get to basically all of the decision makers very quickly and make clear what they want in a, in a time efficient manner, because everyone is here. mean, and I feel like it's the kind of place where if a bunch of lobbyists show up or executives from Coca -Cola, for example, no one's going to really question that because they're like, everybody's in town for the big convention. Of course, all the politicians are here. Of course, whoever's there, but like you've been on the ground.

So what have you observed? Like, have you seen that business transaction? Do they hide in secret cloak rooms and, you know, it's all very cloak and dagger about it? Like what, how does that play out? Well, inside the convention center, there is a special floor, the club level floor. Remember it's an arena, it's a sporting arena. It's the home of the Michael Jordan, Chicago Bulls. Right. So there's a club level, which if you've gone to a basketball game at one of these arenas,

The club level is one of the elite levels and it's the same thing for a convention. need to have a special pass because different lobbies, different corporate groups pay lots of money to get themselves sweets at the convention, just like they get themselves sweets at let's say a bulls game. So that level, the club level is essentially off limits to

The Lever (19:27.564)
the general public the delegates the press et cetera et cetera now some pictures of leaked out about what you see on that club level outside of the swedes which is that that that the lobbies that are trying to influence the politicians were here they're very open about being here it's very it's it's incredibly normalized it's you know the democratic lieutenant governor's association there

suite is sponsored in part by Philip Morris, right? I mean, that's right on the sign of the Democratic Lieutenant Governor's Association. You know, I was in the underground of the arena where they let the guests onto the podium. I managed to get a floor pass and get myself back there. The Democratic cloakroom, which is basically the waiting room, the green room,

was sponsored by Microsoft. Right? just says it's sponsored by Microsoft. Now the question comes up, well, what does that mean? Right? What does it mean? It's spot. What is Microsoft getting from that? Well, it's not like inside the cloakroom, Microsoft lobbyists are necessarily bending the ear of lawmakers, although presumably some of that is going on. It's also letting lawmakers

The political class, the operatives in the political class know who's really calling the shots, who's really the sponsor of the Democratic Party. Which is really funny to actually hear you say that because this is coming not too long after Reid Hoffman, a Microsoft board member, was basically calling for Kamala Harris, who he's a massive donor to, to fire Lena Khan. And there is this whole rigmarole of

no, you know, don't take that seriously. Whatever. I'm not, I'm talking as an expert, not a donor. And then here you have, as Harris is batting away those accusations, a company that was at one point a target of an anti -monopoly lawsuit is sponsoring ostensibly the candidate who is claiming, I am in favor of all this anti -trust stuff. No, I am a fighter. What did AOC say earlier in the week that Kamala Harris fights every single day for working people?

The Lever (21:52.108)
while being right above the Microsoft cloakroom? Exactly. Like that's the hypocrisy there. Although to be clear, I think that it's almost, the other way to look at it is that it's almost honest in how the Democratic party admits that it looks at the world in which it wants to govern in this way. presumably,

The party leaders who set up conventions like this don't see a conflict between politicians promising to regulate industries, industries sponsoring the convention in which those political promises are made, business funding the convention, labor also funding part of the convention. The Democratic Party, I've said this before, I will say it again, it is a party that...

fundamentally wants to pretend that it never really has to make a choice between the working class and the donor class. in some ways, you could argue that can be true on some specific policies. I think that if you look at the Venn diagram of policies that the working class, the middle class, that the people want, you put that in one of the circles on the Venn diagram.

Then you take the policies that don't offend the donor class, the corporate class, the billionaire class. That's another circle. And then you mix them. You get a lot of the policies that the Democrats talk most about. For instance, reproductive rights, right? Reproductive rights has obviously mass popular appeal, rightly so, and doesn't offend the corporate interests who are buying the sweets at the Democratic National Convention, right? That doesn't threaten them. Where it gets dicier though,

is like an event that I went to last night, where it was an event. It was for a series of packs. Sure. That's to honor, that's how they put it, to honor or support the House leadership of the Democrats. And the placards said it was a bunch of climate groups, for instance, Solar Power Energy Industry Association, bunch of, again, climate advocacy groups, but then also a Save Crypto group.

The Lever (24:17.62)
there's also reynolds tobacco there was also the a consortium of fossil fuel companies the american gas associate gap the american gas association of the american clean power association which is basically a natural gas adjacent group of the american nuclear association so what's when you think about that you're like i'm at it a dnc after party and the funniest part is it's funded by all these groups and it's you know

the modicum was to celebrate the power of voters. Right? I mean, it doesn't feel like that's celebrating the power of voters. feels like they're celebrating. Romney said corporations are people too? Okay. I guess that's right. Okay. But the point is, is that at one level it's like, how can all these groups be under the same umbrella? Like how can the solar energy industry association and clean power groups and climate groups be sponsoring the same event as the crypto group and as a

fossil fuel groups, but I think again it goes back to this idea that the Democratic Party pretends there is a world that doesn't need to make choices between any of these entities. And of course we know that you have to make choices. Reality means you have to make choices. You're either going to reduce carbon emissions and end fossil fuel

as the major source of power in the world and save the climate or your climate is going to burn. Like that's just, that's just science. But I think the democratic party doesn't want to acknowledge that because the democratic party as a party wants to raise money from all of them. They want to maximize where they can raise money from.

Does anyone note those contradictions? Like, I can't imagine working for a pro climate group and then sitting at a table with the American Gas Association, you know, maybe the crypto thing. mean, crypto is bad for the environment too. But I mean, is anyone like you, you know, noticing and going, hey, this is kind of weird and bizarre, right? Or does everyone sort of buy into just the

The Lever (26:25.772)
the Comic -Con fantasy Disney world that is the convention and it's like, hey, this is life and you know, we're going to hear a bunch of fun speeches and listen to some music. Yeah, I don't think there's any consciousness of it at all. In fact, at one of the events I was at, I said, look at this billboard of all the sponsors. And I mentioned like crypto and the solar energy industry association and the fossil fuel companies and climate. said, how does this make any sense? And a couple of people I was with, were like, wow.

Like, wow, I really think about that. It's just sort of part of the background. said, I'm trying to, and on that example, I was saying like, what is the vision here? Like, we're to have more crypto that's solar powered crypto is like, that what we're talking about? right? but I don't think it's thought of that clearly. I think it's like, these are the power players trying to like, why are they sponsoring the events?

Well, one to get access, as we discussed, literally just straight up access in those suites at the convention or at these parties, but also as a branding exercise to the donor and political class itself. They are basically saying to all of the attendees at the convention and to all the politicians and to all the political operatives here and the affiliated groups, those brands, when they see them at these different parties, they're saying, we are

stakeholders in the Democratic Party. Right. And I think that's a very important and powerful and insidious message. It is basically corporate America saying we are part owners of this party. And it is the party saying we are happy to have them as part owners of our

You know, I was reading a really good article by Zach Carter on Slate and I had actually talked to Zach earlier this week and one of the things that he noticed is that within the same almost breath the same night you have Gina Raimondo, former governor of Rhode Island, now a cabinet secretary, saying that, you know, we are anti -monopoly while being one of the most pro -corporate politicians that had entered the administration. Then you have AOC saying we are fighting for the working people.

The Lever (28:41.378)
but it's in the middle of this pit of just sheer corporate power. What do you make of that inherent contradiction? know, like, am I being too cynical and kind of reading that as like, are, do they think we're dumb? Like you're going to say this is the party of the working people while you're standing around a bunch of corporate lobbyists. But what have you made of that contradiction as you've been there? Well, I think, look, first of all, I think there are many factions of the democratic party. So I do think when

Bernie Sanders or AOC talks about this stuff, when we put it up against their record, I think they're pretty consistent. Just because the event is a corporate event, which it is. I the Democratic National Convention is a corporate event. I don't even think that's in dispute. I mean, I think there's value in it. think it's the delegates who come from all over the country who are really the grassroots warriors of the party. think it's valuable to them in a good way.

right, meaning valuable at a grassroots level, but it is a corporate event. And I think that what some people try to do is use the platform to try to push the party this way or that. I think also though, you're right. Like there are politicians who are actively corporate politicians who are trying to gaslight the delegates and the party faithful and everyone watching on TV, trying to gaslight them.

into believing that these politicians are, well, as Kamala Harris's motto goes, that they're for the people. I mean, one of the things that's been disturbing to me about this campaign so far is last night, and I'm talking to you on Thursday night, so on Wednesday night, there was this whole video production, for instance, about how Kamala Harris had really led the fight.

against wall street during and after the financial crisis and the and the foreclosure crisis which is just that's just false it's just it's a lie yeah it is it's a lie it's the opposite of the truth i mean yes she she participated in the national mortgage settlement but to to portray her as leading it to portray her as

The Lever (31:03.19)
really the vanguard of pushing for a tougher settlement a crackdown on wall street is just it's not only untrue it's the opposite of the truth and the thing that's bothersome about that is it's one thing to to to exaggerate somebody a good ass a good side of somebody's record a little bit to really lean into it you know spotlighted that that's that's politics yeah it's another thing to take

a piece of a politician's record that is their weak spot, that they should be embarrassed about, and then portray it as their strongest spot. That's a level of Orwellian dishonesty that is deeply problematic. sure, will it work in the short term? Maybe. Does the average Democratic voter know or even care about

the mortgage settlement as an example. You know, unfortunately, probably not. Yeah. But it is a deeply cynical tactic. And I think it tells us frankly, how the Democratic Party bosses see their own voters. They see their own voters as being will, as being gullible, as not caring. I think that what you're talking about is exactly what we were talking about with Jay Caspian Kang last week. This is part of the reason it's really important.

for the press, really anyone to probe and interrogate Kamala Harris's actual history as an elected official and a politician. And this is kind of the danger of running a vibes -based campaign and sort of buying into a vibes -based campaign because look, you and I, work here at the lever. We would love to see more of a crackdown on corporate power. We would love to see, you know, politicians taking on bankers.

But there has to be action with that. can't just, you know, do a fun TikTok video or make a great speech. And I think that's something that I'm hoping that's going to change as this election moves on. know here we're going to, you know, do a couple of episodes looking at Kamala Harris's history. But I think what you raised right there, that contradiction is exactly why we need to be probing Kamala Harris. Well, 100 percent. But now I do think there's a silver lining. I do think that the themes of this convention

The Lever (33:22.794)
even though it's dishonest to say the least to portray Kamala Harris as a tough on Wall Street crime kind of person as dishonest as that is, it is an acknowledgement that those politics are popular, that the Democrats want that brand now. I mean, that may sound like an obvious thing for them to understand, but it wasn't that long ago that there was this very deep and

intense ideological competition in the party between what used to be called the DLC, the corporate wing of the party, and the progressive wing of the party. And I think at least in terms of rhetoric and desired brand, that the progressive populist wing of the party has won the argument that clearly even corporate Democrats, like for instance, Gina Raimondo,

the commerce secretary one of the most has always been one of the most conservative economically conservative members of the democratic party if even she's talking for instance anti -monopoly at the democratic convention it's an acknowledgement that the rhetorical debate about what kind of politics is popular that debate is over absolutely the democrats actually in understand that they have to look like

at least aesthetically, in the optics, they have to look like populists. Now where the rubber hits the road is what happens in those suites, those corporate suites that we talked about, right? Because where the rubber hits the road is, will the brand, the populist brand, translate into actual policy? Do you notice when you're going around the floor, I believe you've been to DNCs in the past before, Yes.

When you've been going around on the floor, because you know, I saw on Facebook, there are a couple of people who from Massachusetts were showing the Massachusetts delegation. Those people tend to seem to come more from the grassroots. Does that feel different? You know, does that popular energy manifest from them? And is this a different feeling vibe? You know, and I know I just ragged on talking about vibes, but I'm going to ask you, does the vibe at least from the delegates and the kind of grassroots really feel different from the conventions of the past?

The Lever (35:49.302)
No, it feels very similar to me and I say that in a good way. I sat with the Colorado delegation for a while on the floor with the Colorado delegation because I'm from Colorado. And you know, these are the rank and file, I mean, they're the elected officials too, but they're the rank and file people who like knock on doors and make phone calls. like this is a big event for them because it's a recognition of them and their hard work and their importance to the party. Because again, while we talk about

the corporate suites and the brands and the corporate influence at the convention, the party also is recognizing that it needs foot soldiers. This is as much a way to try to pump up the foot soldiers as anything else. I think talking to these delegates, I think they're excited. Frankly, I think they're primarily excited that they believe that

Donald Trump is not going to be president again. Or at least there's a better chance he's not going to be president than when Biden was the nominee. So I think that all of that part of the convention, that part is really authentic. It's real. It's not to be laughed at. It's not to be scoffed at. But clearly, the people who are on the floor of the convention, their interests are in conflict with the people up in the corporate suites.

And the elected officials move between both of those worlds. And the central question of the Democratic Party, really of all politics, is which side are they on? And I think, I don't think we have a clear, a fully clear answer on that. But I will, I will, I will also add one other point that I have been pleasantly surprised that I thought the party

in its video messages and its presentations and its keynote speeches and in Kamala Harris's first inklings of policy, they haven't been mealy -mouthed, haven't been wishy -washy, they've been very limited in what they've put out there, but in what they've put out there, they've been more embracing of the populist line than I thought.

The Lever (38:06.732)
they were going to be and i think that is mildly encouraging now what i will also say this talking to a number of good government advocacy groups public interest advocacy groups most of the people that i've been talking to at this convention whether it's in the anti -monopoly world labor world or the like they understand that the branding of the party the branding of harris right now this early branding as a populist

That's an opportunity for them to try to hold the prospective White House, if Harris wins, hold them to those promises. That's the work they're going to need to do after the election. I think a lot of them understand that

that the rhetoric is merely an opportunity. It's not a guarantee. At the top of the show, we had heard that you and David Day and the executive editor of the American Prospect, you had a chance to go to sort of a press conference with a group of senators. I know you've been talking to other elected officials as you're out there. Who have you been talking to and have any kind of stood out to you? And what have you been talking to them about? Yeah, well, we we got a chance to sit in on Senator Gary Peters.

senator masto from nevada and senator warlock from georgia as they presented the electoral picture for the senate democrats and the question that we asked was the candidates are making all these promises that were a code of codify row we're gonna we're gonna raise the minimum wage we're gonna do you know expand health care are the candidates explicitly saying

these Senate candidates out in America, are they saying they're committed to ending the filibuster? Because the thing is, is that if you don't end the filibuster, none of these pledges will happen. I mean, that's just a fact of life. And Senator Masto from Nevada, she said, never hear from, or I never hear from, and our candidates never hear from voters asking...

The Lever (40:16.962)
whether we're going to end the filibuster. But I can tell you in Nevada, is that what voters are asking Jackie Rosen or asked me? No, it is still.

The issues that matter to them are those kitchen table issues, affordable housing, access to quality health care, right? How do we reduce some of these costs? How do we keep our communities safe? What are we doing? Those are what I am hearing and heard in my re -elect and am hearing still now at the end of the day. The only other thing that our voters are talking about because Donald Trump elevated it

it was a border. When we had a solution to address some of the challenges that we saw at the border and then Donald Trump came along and killed it and asked his Republican colleagues not to vote for it. That has elevated to for voters in my state. Those are the conversations when I'm out. That's what so I suspect that's what Jackie is hearing and our electeds as well. It's probably true that

people are running up to senator saying you know and the filibuster people running up to senator saying are you gonna raise my wages are you gonna it deals climate change are you gonna help improve the material conditions of our lives but but but that answer that she gave a sort of cynical because you have course the average voters and asking you about the filibuster but the filibuster is the obstacle

to delivering on what you're Yeah, I mean, you can't kind of disentangle what the filibuster has done and the role that it's played without as an isolation. The reason it's such a devious tactic is because of how much popular legislation that it has stalled. I frankly think my takeaway is, is that a lot of these candidates, Senate candidates, are probably nervous about saying they want to end the filibuster because

The Lever (42:13.216)
it gives their opponent a chance to say, look, in a swing state, they're going to end the filibuster and allow, you know, if you're in a conservative swing state, allow Bernie Sanders and Tyra Jena to fly through the Senate, right? They'll paint you as some lefty communist. I think a lot of it. But look, Chris Murphy from Connecticut, we also talked to him about this. And he essentially said, you're absolutely right. Like, like

We won't be able to get our agenda done unless we deal with filibuster.

The Lever (42:50.05)
Thanks for listening to another episode of Levertime. This episode was produced by me, Arjun Singh, with editing support from Joel Warner. Our theme music was composed by Nick Campbell. We'll be back next week with more episodes of Levertime.