The Filibuster is Here to Stay
And that's a good thing…
It’s rare for politicians in Washington to stay consistent on anything. From Republicans changing their view on tariffs to Joe Biden’s flip-flopping on the Hyde amendment. Politicians have an uncanny knack for reversing their positions off the political climate of the day.
That is why Senator Krysten Sinema should be applauded for her consistent defense of the filibuster despite her colleague’s newfound distaste of the decades-old Senate rule.
Writing for the Washington Post, Sinema laid out out a strong case for defending the filibuster. Grounded in prudence, the Senator rebuked the idea that support for the filibuster depends on the minority/majority status of the senator:
If anyone expected me to reverse my position because my party now controls the Senate, they should know that my approach to legislating in Congress is the same whether in the minority or majority.
My support for retaining the 60-vote threshold is not based on the importance of any particular policy. It is based on what is best for our democracy. The filibuster compels moderation and helps protect the country from wild swings between opposing policy poles.
It’s refreshing to see a politician not waver in their position even when under fire from members of her own party. If only all members of Congress had the same guts.
With the support of Sinema and Joe Manchin, the filibuster has no chance of being eliminated. As I said earlier, this is a good thing, especially for preserving a healthy democracy. In Federalist 62, James Madison outlines an essential function of the Senate writing, “the additional impediment it must prove against improper acts of legislation.” The Senate was designed to be more deliberate in its legislation and to cool the tempers of the public. It is not an institution crafted for stuffing legislation through by a slim majority.
Furthermore, the filibuster prevents the federal government from behaving like a political pendulum rocking violently from side to side. Take for example, the recently filibustered For The People Act. If the filibuster did not exist and the act passed, who’s to say that the next time Republicans take the Senate, they don’t completely eliminate the law and replace it with their own? Major pieces of legislation would bounce back and forth depending on which party is in power at the moment.
The filibuster mandates that policies receive national buy-in to ensure that majorities don’t steamroll over the rights of the minority. New laws are to be passed only through cooperation and compromise, not by an iron bludgeon. This system stymies radical legislation and fosters moderation.
Democrats once understood the importance of the filibuster. In 2017, when President Trump was attacking the filibuster, 31 Democratic senators signed a letter to the Senate leadership voicing their support for the 60-vote rule. Throughout the rest of Trump’s presidency, Democrats utilized the filibuster numerous times to thwart the Republican agenda.
Unfortunately, now many Democrats have forgotten their principles in exchange for political power. Lucky for them, there are still some, such as Sinema and Manchin, which have prevented them from indulging in their worst impulses.
As for now, the filibuster is safe, but that security is undoubtedly temporary. Defenders of the rule must be strong and vigilant in their defense, for it’s only ever a new congress away from destruction.
