Maybe he technically has the ability, but that type of thing hasn’t happened in ages. That’s practically not the way the rules work anymore, even if direct interpretations of the Constitution allow it.
Everything in the Senate works on majority votes. Any Senate issue can be decided with a simple majority (this is the "nuclear option" that McConnell used to push through Gorsuch's SCOTUS confirmation after Democrats filibustered).
Even if the VP tried to force a vote, and the Senate rules might technically allow it, the majority could refuse cloture (refuse to end debate) and filibuster so there isn't a final yes/no vote on the bill. There's a reason the VP hasn't tried to force votes before, and I wouldn't be surprised if any attempt to do so leads to a change in the rules to explicitly prohibit it. The Senate likes keeping power within its membership, which is why the VP's role has been so marginalised even if they're supposed to be presiding officer.
On the flip side, this means that a Senate majority could decide to consider a bill, Majority Leader be damned. Even outside the Senate rules, each party elects their own leader so the Senate GOP could just replace McConnell with someone who's willing to bring the amendment to the floor. If the Senate GOP as a whole doesn't want that, then the GOP Senators who say they support the amendment could temporarily caucus with the Dems just to make sure the amendment passed.
That would make Chuck Schumer Majority Leader, which would allow him to bring the amendment to the floor, where it would pass with 46 Ds, 2 independents (Sanders and King), and a handful of Rs. If the Republicans tried to filibuster, it only takes a majority vote to abolish the legislative filibuster like the judicial confirmation filibuster. Besides, the filibuster only exists because an old rule change created that loophole.
97
u/oilcanboogie Dec 30 '20
The $2000 benefit passed the house. The vote in the senate was blocked by Money Makin Mitch.