Washington, D.C. – Mark Kelly dice una cosa en Arizona, pero hace lo contrario cuando esta presionado por los jefes de su partido político y los donantes de intereses especiales en Washington. Por ejemplo, Mark Kelly continúa esquivando preguntas de su posición sobre el filibuster. En no tener una posición sobre la preservación del filibuster, Kelly está en directa contradicción de su colega la senadora Kyrsten Sinema y el senador John McCain a quien se comprometió a emular.
Real Clear Politics: “Sinema, Not Kelly, Follows in McCain’s Filibuster Footsteps” de Susan Crabtree:
In his remarks that night, Kelly invoked John McCain’s legacy and pledged to try to live up to his reputation as a maverick with a backbone of steel – a lawmaker who was willing to stand up to his party’s leadership when he thought it was wrong.
“Our state doesn’t need a Democrat senator or a Republican senator,” Kelly proclaimed. “We need an Arizona senator. A senator like John McCain.”
It was a familiar refrain. During his campaign, the challenger repeatedly cited the longtime lawmaker as his model, pledging to put partisan politics aside and work with political opponents to forge compromise. On McCain’s birthday in late August, Kelly tweeted a tribute, calling McCain “tough, principled, and willing to work with anyone to get things done for Arizona.”
So far, however, it has been the state’s other Democratic senator, Kyrsten Sinema, who has been willing to buck her party’s leadership regarding some of its top priorities, including this year’s push to change or eliminate the filibuster, the procedural rule essentially requiring most legislation to receive 60 votes to pass the Senate.
This one-time Green Party member known for wearing a pink tutu to antiwar rallies has transformed herself into a pragmatic Democrat. It has been a news-making metamorphosis – much more in the mold of John McCain than Kelly in his first months in office – and one not appreciated by the Democratic Party faithful. […]
While Sinema appears to be enjoying flexing her maverick muscles, Kelly has been hesitant, especially when it comes to the filibuster, which McCain always defended. Over the course of the campaign and in his first months in office, Kelly has refused to take a clear stand on the issue. It’s not hard to see why: He’s in a tough spot politically. His win over McSally in a purple-trending state was only in a special election to fill out McCain’s term, so he’ll be on the ballot once again in 2022.
His equivocation was on display when pressed on the filibuster by the Arizona Republic.
“Well, when we get to the point where we’re going to have, you know, a serious discussion about this, I’ll make a decision based on what’s in the best interest of Arizona and the country,” he told reporters for his state’s largest newspaper.
“Change is generally a good thing, but the details matter. So, I will make a decision, not what’s in the best interest of the Democratic Party but what’s in the best interest of Arizona, the country.”
From last year to late March, Kelly has offered a string of similar evasions as several Democrats from bluer states openly campaigned to kill the 60-vote requirement for most bills.
McCain, however, never waffled in his view about modifying or abolishing the filibuster. Over the last decade, up until his death in 2018, he led the fight against changing or abolishing the procedure, arguing that to do so would permanently damage the Senate as an institution and the way the nation’s founders envisioned it as the more deliberative body. […]
For now, Kelly continues to try to straddle the issue – aiming to avoid alienating either his Senate Democratic leadership or moderate Arizona voters who could take a dim view of a move that would essentially green-light the most liberal parts of Biden’s agenda. Although this hedge may be smart politics for a freshman senator, it reminds no one in Arizona of the famous maverick whom Kelly pledged to emulate.
###