There’s been considerable chatter these past few months about a tool called the “filibuster” in the US Senate.
It’s basically a way for the minority Party of the Senate to prevent legislation from moving forward to a vote. It used to be that a filibuster was when one or more Senators could talk for as long as they wished on any subject they chose during debate – a process that could only be stopped if 60 Senators agree to close debate – but now it merely requires a threat to filibuster to hold up a vote.
So when you have a 50-50 split of the Senate, you can understand why not much gets done. We saw very recently how Republicans filibustered a bill to establish a Jan 6 commission – to fully fund an investigation into every aspect that led to one of the most appalling moments in our country’s history. Even with several Republicans on board, they couldn’t get to a 60-vote threshold needed to overcome the filibuster.
Interestingly, and not surprisingly, the three conservative judges recently appointed to the Supreme Court were able to do so, because the then Republican Senate Majority changed the rules to say that the filibuster rule no longer needed to be in effect. A simple 1-vote majority would be enough to confirm one of their judges. But now that they’re no longer the majority party, the filibuster is suddenly important!
Now I can appreciate the desire to give the minority party some tools to prevent them from being railroaded. Recently, “Democrat” Senator Kyrsten Sinema stated that the filibuster was “…a tool that protects the democracy of our nation.”
But is it truly a democracy that’s being saved here?
Continue reading










