The Filibuster: Principle Over Expedience

In a recent debate of South Carolina candidates in the GOP primary election for U.S. Senate, three of the five contenders present espoused the demise of the Senate’s filibuster rule. Each indicated that he or she would eagerly work to eliminate this quintessential procedure preserving unlimited debate.

Why would they embrace such a dramatic step, erasing the Senate’s hallmark distinction of two centuries? Especially given its strong, principled conservative support for this important element of the Constitution’s checks and balances.

President Trump wants the SAVE America Act, which among other reforms would require voters to show an ID to vote, on his desk ASAP. He wants it in law yesterday, which the voter ID provision should be because it’s so common-sense. These candidates’ parroting Trump’s wish is simply seeking brownie points.

It’s not as simple as Trump portrays. SAVE has provisions that will result in legal challenges and likely some of the sections canceled on federalism grounds—one reason the bill doesn’t have the votes.

The president has latched onto expediency. He’s been badgering Senate Majority Leader John Thune to change Senate rules and get rid of the filibuster. More precisely, the rule change would lower the threshold for invoking cloture, i.e., ending debate on a measure, to 51 votes.

Republican Leader Thune and nearly all Republican senators oppose that shortsighted tactic. The filibuster requires a 3/5 supermajority to proceed to debating legislation or voting on legislation.

Grousing about the Senate’s filibuster isn’t new. Some Republicans called for changing cloture rules when Democrats used the filibuster to block President George W. Bush’s nominees. Democrats have advocated ending filibusters when the shoe was on the other foot, such as during the Biden years as the Left pushed expediency to enact much of the Green New Deal and other extremist policies.

I began my career in Washington working in the U.S. Senate. I learned more about and came to greatly appreciate the vital nature of the filibuster. Its role is to safeguard against the tyranny of the simple majority. Extended debate can help facilitate discussion and negotiation—serving to ensure the Senate is the cooling saucer to the House’s hot tea, as President Washington put it.

Those with only U.S. House experience tend to underappreciate the essentiality of the Senate’s filibuster. That’s why imprudent firebrands hop on the unwise “kill the filibuster” bandwagon. When I worked on the House side, I saw this immature position arise every time there was a tight partisan margin, which is the source of the current impatience.

As a Capitol Hill staffer and a lobbyist, I’ve seen more defensive legislative wins than offensive ones because the Founders designed Congress that way. Many times, the House has passed legislation that died in the Senate because of the supermajority requirement for invoking cloture.

There are procedural revisions that could help revive the “talking filibuster.” But reducing the U.S. Senate to a simple majoritarian body like the House would be a disservice to the Founders’ intent of a body characterized by thorough debate and working out a mutually acceptable measure—even though it may slow the process. That model has served America well for a very long time.

Granted, it isn’t perfect or foolproof. But its elimination would be destructive of the best interests of our country.

The cooling saucer function would be gone permanently, relegating policymaking to the sort of swings we’ve suffered under in recent years—back and forth, a pendulum from one administration’s policies to the next one’s. Only then, it would be dramatic swings in statute instead of more temporary measures like executive orders and regulations.

I cannot in good conscience or my best judgment vote for someone who would remove the protection the filibuster provides our nation. Candidates and voters must think better of giving either party a much clearer shot at enacting unwise or extremist legislation.