On July 27, President Trump again urged Senate Republicans to use the “nuclear option” to end the 60- vote filibuster rule to pass the SAVE America Act, the bill requiring documentary proof of voter citizenship and photo ID for casting a ballot.
A filibuster is the Senate procedure that attempts to delay or block a vote by extending debate indefinitely. Because Senate rules allow for unlimited discussion, a simple majority cannot force a final vote unless a supermajority of 60 senators agrees to end debate.
“John Thune should not allow the United States Senate to ‘leave town’ until it passes The SAVE America Act or, far better still, TERMINATES THE FILIBUSTER, where Republicans can then quickly pass everything they ever dreamed of,” Trump wrote on social media.
He argues the GOP is giving up an advantage if it doesn’t use the “nuclear option” first: “The Democrats will do it on day one.”
It’s a very bad idea—maybe Trump’s worst ever.
He would give left-liberals the ability with 50 Senate votes, plus a Vice-Presidential tie breaker, to enact radical change.
They could pack the Supreme Court with four new justices, create new states out of Puerto Rico and Washington D.C., pass Medicare for All, raise the minimum wage to $25 an hour, and much more, in exchange for a voting bill that isn’t even a clear winner for the GOP.
It’s possible Senate Democrats will nuke the 60-vote legislative filibuster rule but they didn’t under President Biden, despite pressure from the left, which also wanted to pass everything they ever dreamed of.
Two Democrats publicly refused– Sens. Kyrsten Sinema and Joe Manchin. Neither remains in office. How many other Senate Democrats quietly agreed with them but didn’t want to take the political heat is unknown.
Notably, Democratic Pennsylvania Sen. John Fetterman wrote a July 27 Washington Post op-ed praising the filibuster for forcing compromise. He campaigned on killing the filibuster in 2022, but subsequent events have “vindicated” Sinema and Manchin in his view.
He urged voters who dislike Trump’s agenda to imagine a world without the 60-vote rule: “Republicans could fundamentally change the entire government and country with a simple majority vote.”
The filibuster benefits the country by ensuring stability, so national policy doesn’t constantly flip between polar extremes.
This also happens to advantage the conservative party, because it makes radical change hard to enact. Breaking the filibuster would remove a structural check on the ability of temporary majorities to fundamentally reshape American society.
Even if Republicans move first, as Trump promotes, the long-term result would be to inevitably ratchet things steadily to the left.
Our Founders original design for the Senate was for a broad number of members to “work through issues” before passing bills. This contributed to the Senate’s reputation as the world’s greatest deliberative body. By design, it requires compromise and finding common ground.
Former Republican Nebraska Sen. Ben Sasse in a July 20 Wall Street Journal op-ed, “America Needs the Filibuster” wrote:
“When partisans talk about killing the filibuster, they’re saying they want to turn the Senate into another House of Representatives. That would be a tragic mistake. The filibuster prevents the dramatic pendulum swings that are the natural result of simple-majority lawmaking.”
“Partisans warn of doom if their agenda isn’t enacted, but their expedient is what threatens the republic.”
The MAGA base loves the idea that Republicans could achieve everything, if only their leaders would fight harder, somehow. It isn’t true. Whether or not Trump truly believes throngs of illegal voters are the only reason Republicans ever lose, it isn’t true.
Senator Thune has said repeatedly there aren’t 50 votes to kill the filibuster. Thank goodness. Doing it to pass the SAVE America Act would be like committing armed robbery to steal $5. Thune needs to stand firm.
The opinions expressed by contributors are their own and do not necessarily represent the views of Nevada News & Views. Digital technology may have been used in the research, writing, or production of this article. Please verify information and consult additional sources as needed.
