Utah Sen. John Curtis reiterated his long-held position that he will not back any efforts to eliminate the Senate filibuster, going against one of President Donald Trump’s top demands for Republicans in Congress.
In an op-ed in the Wall Street Journal on Thursday, Curtis laid out a defense of the filibuster procedure, which requires 60 votes to end debate on most pieces of legislation. The procedure has long been debated by both parties as it often serves as a tool for the minority to block the majority’s agenda if it is deemed to be too partisan.
But the tool is crucial for ensuring debate and protecting independence, Curtis argued.
“Under no circumstance will I support any effort to end or alter the filibuster, as any party that does so wouldn’t be guaranteed survival,” Curtis wrote. “Their agenda would be guaranteed death come the next majority.”
The debate around the filibuster is often misunderstood, Curtis wrote, as its form has changed since its inception. Its original structure forced senators to physically debate legislation until an agreement could be reached.
“It was a small group of people sitting in a room, working through issues, knowing that if they wanted to act, they had to reach agreement,” Curtis wrote. “In that setting, if no one could force the end of debate, the only way forward was to work it out.”
That system is no longer the same as the Senate has grown larger. With 100 senators, unlimited debate can grind action on any piece of legislation to a halt.
Senate rules were updated in 1917 to allow for an alternative route known as invoking cloture, which allows senators to vote on ending debate so long as they have significant support — which requires 60 votes under current rules.
Cloture has since become the norm in the Senate because it expedites voting schedules, although it often requires a bipartisan vote to pass any one piece of legislation. In the past year, that’s halted several Republican bills central to their agenda but that have failed to garner Democratic support.
But the process of invoking cloture, Curtis argued, protects the original design to “work through issues.”
“This tradition contributed to the Senate’s reputation as the world’s greatest deliberative body,” he wrote. “Not because senators speak longer, but because no one can be easily ignored. The structure forces engagement. It requires listening.”
The filibuster is what differentiates the Senate from the House, where legislation is passed by simple majority votes. Curtis, who served in the House before being elected to the Senate, said it protects the independence of lawmakers in a way the lower chamber cannot.
“In seven years in the House, I didn’t have a single meaningful opportunity to influence major legislation,” Curtis said. “In the Senate, and as a freshman, I found myself in the thick of every major piece of legislation.”
Trump calls for end to filibuster
Curtis’ latest op-ed comes as Trump has renewed his calls to terminate the filibuster and clear the way for the SAVE America Act to be passed. The proof-of-citizenship and voter ID legislation has been stalled in the Senate for months because of the 60-vote hurdle.
“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, including a full and deep throated SAVE AMERICA ACT,” Trump wrote in a Truth Social post on Monday. “The Dumocrats will do it on day one, and can’t believe how lucky they got with this Senate leadership.”
Curtis’ counterpart, Sen. Mike Lee, has also joined the chorus pushing to eliminate the filibuster, despite once defending the procedure as “one of the important restraints and checks on human nature.” However, Lee has shifted his opinion in recent months as the filibuster has been used to stall his proof-of-citizenship and voter ID legislation.
“We should nuke the filibuster to pass the SAVE America Act,” Lee said in a social media post. “If we don’t have the votes to nuke the filibuster, we should put the SAVE America Act on the floor and debate it until it passes, requiring filibustering senators to speak and making clear that if they stop speaking, we can “call the question” and pass it with a simple majority.”
Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., has repeatedly stressed there is not the support necessary among Republicans to eliminate the filibuster. Staying in recess, he argued, wouldn’t alter the math.
“This is not an open question,” he said. “It’s just a fact, and the facts don’t change. Now, if (Trump) can change the facts and start moving some of those senators who are no’s into yeses, then we have a different conversation. But that’s just the reality.”