Three years ago, when Democrats controlled the Senate, I wrote that, while they likely hated how Republicans could filibuster and kill their favorite bills, they would cheer that ability one day when they were in the minority.
I hate to say I told you so, so I won’t. Instead, I’ll refer you to an op-ed Democratic Sen. John Fetterman of Pennsylvania just wrote for The Washington Post.
Fetterman was elected in part on a promise to end the filibuster rule in the Senate that requires 60 votes to override. Now, he said, he realizes he and other Democrats were “horribly wrong.”
The reason is simple. Ending the filibuster would allow the ruling party in the Senate to pass whatever measure it wants with only a simple majority. The House has no filibuster, so simple majorities already rule there.
The tables will turn
This may be great now for Republicans, who control both chambers, but with today’s razor-thin partisan margins, the other party is bound to take control eventually, and that would mean a whiplash of repeals and new laws.
“Trump’s victory and Republicans taking control of both chambers of Congress quickly showed how chaotic a simple majority vote could be in the Senate,” Fetterman wrote. “Media outlets and political pundits are routinely alarmed and outraged over the constant churn of new policies from the current administration. And if Americans are horrified now, imagine what could be law today if Democrats had eliminated the filibuster.”
Fetterman listed a few of these. No doubt, the list made many Republicans drool. However, every GOP official could write a long list of Democratic programs the filibuster has prevented the nation from, as well.
Would we want a simple majority of Democrats to create new states with Democratic senators, or to expand the Supreme Court with justices favorable to its agenda?
How the filibuster helps
Three years ago, I quoted a paper on the essential nature of the filibuster, written by Senate expert Martin B. Gold for the Orrin G. Hatch Foundation. Among other things, he said the filibuster makes the Senate more deliberative and thoughtful, even as it is forced to compromise with the minority party to obtain its goals. As a result, both parties become equal partners in solving the nation’s most difficult problems.
Deliberate and thoughtful sounds a lot better than haphazard and vengeful.
President Donald Trump is calling on Republicans in the Senate to end the filibuster rule in order to pass the SAVE America Act, sponsored by Sen. Mike Lee, R-Utah. Such a move would trade a possible short-term gain for a boatload of troubles ahead.
Utah’s other senator, Republican John Curtis, wrote an op-ed for the Wall Street Journal this week in which he defended the filibuster, citing the Senate’s history and the need to “‘work through issues’ before passing bills.”
Because of the filibuster, Curtis wrote, “no one can be easily ignored.”
The president argues that Democrats will jettison the filibuster rule when they retake the Senate, anyway. That is possible, but the party was unable to find the votes to do so under President Joe Biden, and wiser senators always seem to prevail with the wisdom that what goes around, comes around.
Yes, Republicans could rebound by undoing everything Democrats did, and more, when they eventually regain control. This back and forth, the Wall Street Journal editorial board wisely said, “would be highly destabilizing, and progressives would have the clear advantage. If Democrats packed the Supreme Court with four new Justices who have life tenure, would Republicans unpack it later? Doubtful.”
Neither is it assured they could turn back new programs, any more than they were able to roll back Obamacare when they had the chance.
The Deseret News editorial board has long supported the need to retain the filibuster. In 2016, it noted that Democrats were regretting having removed the filibuster the filibuster three years earlier for many judicial and executive branch appointments, now that Republicans had regained control and were doing the same.
“With Republicans now in power, Democrats realize they made a fool’s bargain,” the board said in an editorial.
For now, the filibuster seems secure. Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-N.D., has said he lacks the votes to nuke it, much to the president’s dismay. Beyond that, Thune has said it would be a bad idea and that the filibuster “has protected this country.”
Fetterman put it this way: “We have a great democracy that is imperfect, but it requires working together. If we don’t do that willingly, the filibuster will force us to. That’s the way it should be.”
And it’s a good way to keep me from saying I told you so again.