ELISSA NADWORNY, HOST:
President Trump wants Senate Majority Leader John Thune to fire Senate Parliamentarian Elizabeth MacDonough. Why? Because she said funds for his ballroom don't belong in the recently passed immigration enforcement bill. And she says Trump's bill to require voter ID is subject to the filibuster. Alan Frumin served as Senate parliamentarian for decades under both Democratic and Republican leadership, and he joins us now. Welcome.
ALAN FRUMIN: I'm glad to be here.
NADWORNY: So we said why President Trump wants your successor fired. But why does she get to say what can and can't be done in Senate legislation?
FRUMIN: The Senate has complex rules, and the Senate needs to have a competent career nonpartisan professional interpreting those rules, and that person's Elizabeth MacDonough.
NADWORNY: How does one get to be a parliamentarian?
FRUMIN: Everybody who's been Senate parliamentarian has come up through the ranks. Elizabeth MacDonough, like I, was hired to be the most junior parliamentarian. She was hired in 1999, when Republican Trent Lott of Mississippi was the majority leader. She basically said, I want to make nonpartisan service to the Senate my career. And everybody who's been Senate parliamentarian has basically made that pledge to the Senate - I'm staying here, you are training me, you are evaluating me, and if I am capable and you respect my integrity, ultimately, when it's my turn, I will become the parliamentarian.
NADWORNY: What's the process for hiring and firing one?
FRUMIN: (Laughter) I always take issue when people say the majority leader appoints the parliamentarian. I tell people the majority leader inherits the parliamentarian, the person who's either in that position or next in line, if there's a vacancy. And so majority leaders have no role in elevating people to the position of parliamentarian. However, the majority leader has the power to direct the secretary of the Senate to fire that person.
NADWORNY: Does that often come under pressure from a president?
FRUMIN: Never has.
NADWORNY: Interesting. Now, the House has a parliamentarian as well. Why don't we hear about that one? Like, why do we hear about the one in the Senate so much more often?
FRUMIN: Because the burdens placed on the Senate parliamentarian are unique. The House is a majoritarian body. It operates basically by strict majority rule. It has a rules committee that determines the procedural landscape for the consideration of legislation. And so the House parliamentarian is not faced with the vast number of judgment calls that the Senate parliamentarian is faced with.
NADWORNY: Can you talk about your experience maybe with the Affordable Care Act? I mean, that was legislative high drama during President Obama's first 15 months in office.
FRUMIN: Well, I told the Democrats that they should not look to the reconciliation process. Reconciliation process avoids a filibuster. The Democrats were close to getting 60, which is the magic number you need for cloture, and I told the Democrats that something as complicated as what we now know as Obamacare could never pass through reconciliation. And don't darken my door and try to convince me that Obamacare - I said it would just be impossible, and that's what they did.
The Affordable Care Act was passed as a regular filibusterable bill. However, there are problems with it that needed tweaking, and the Democrats did use reconciliation to tweak some of the problems that were found in the Affordable Care Act. During that period of time, there were rumors that I had death threats, and the sergeant at arms denied that he had heard any rumors of death threats. But nonetheless, he posted security at my house.
NADWORNY: And did you feel in that time like you were at the center of a storm? Did you worry about the state of your job?
FRUMIN: I didn't worry about the state of my job. I worried about my personal safety. And when somebody says, you know, we believe you have been having death threats, you don't just ignore that. You know, I felt my job was secure, but my life wasn't.
NADWORNY: (Laughter) Wow. I guess I wonder, like, does President Trump have, legislatively speaking, a fair case to make with his complaints?
FRUMIN: No, absolutely not. I have not heard any rational argument made on behalf of people who are taking issue with what Elizabeth MacDonough is doing. She's doing her job.
NADWORNY: That's former Senate Parliamentarian Alan Frumin. Thank you so much for speaking with us.
FRUMIN: You're quite welcome. Happy to talk to you. Transcript provided by NPR, Copyright NPR.
NPR transcripts are created on a rush deadline by an NPR contractor. This text may not be in its final form and may be updated or revised in the future. Accuracy and availability may vary. The authoritative record of NPR’s programming is the audio record.
