Filibuster Actually Lessens Senate’s Power

The best argument against eliminating the filibuster is also proof positive that the filibuster is an extra-constitutional invention that weakens the experiment in self-government intended by our nation’s Founders.

I admit I was a little unsettled when a reader warned about statehood in Washington and the prospect of “two Marxist senators” to counter my last column to end the filibuster.

Indeed, admitting new states with a simple majority in Congress could give Democrats a partisan advantage if they decide to offer statehood to the District of Columbia, but there are three things to remember:

1) This is the system that the Constitution deliberately established, and for more than two centuries it has not destroyed the republic.

2) The Constitution already requires bicameral approval and presidential assent. This in itself is a significant political obstacle.

3) And if Democrats actually viewed Washington State as existential, they could eliminate the filibuster for this purpose with a simple majority – just as both parties have already done for judges and reconciliation.

The real danger for the republic is not that one party might temporarily go too far. This is because neither party can govern in any meaningful way. A system in which voters cannot reward or punish ruling majorities is not stable: it stagnates.

The Constitution does not require a qualified majority for ordinary laws. In fact, it only specifies them in specific and explicit cases – treaties, impeachment convictions, constitutional amendments. The editors knew how to demand increased consensus when they wanted it. They did not do it for routine legislation.

Maybe they knew what they were doing. Consider the SAVE America Act, which I talked about last time. It would require proof of citizenship to register to vote in federal elections, eliminate mail-only registrations and require photo ID nationwide. Is there anything more common – or obvious – than protecting the integrity of elections?

Yet Senate Majority Leader John Thune was more interested in protecting his institutional power than in taking the necessary steps to bring this critical piece of the Republican agenda to the Senate floor for a vote. His putative allies even offered to reinstate the traditional “talking filibuster” as a compromise, but Thune agreed to nothing. He stubbornly objected, protecting Senate procedure rather than the people’s vote.

It is worth remembering that the modern filibuster bears little resemblance to the senatorial tradition it purports to uphold. For most of the country’s history, senators who wanted to block a bill had to actually stand on the floor and talk – sometimes for hours or even days. The silent filibuster that now requires 60 votes for almost all bills is a relatively recent invention, allowing senators to veto legislation without debate, endurance, or public accountability. In other words, the rule meant to protect Senate tradition has itself become a modern distortion of it.

Finally, let’s be clear about the long-term effects of an inactive Senate blocked by institutional paralysis. When Congress cannot legislate, power does not disappear. This is changing. Presidents use executive orders. Agencies reinterpret laws without guidance. The courts become political arbiters. Voters lose clarity on responsibility.

If a party wins, it must govern and not hide behind a few decades of tradition. Whether it’s the SAVE America Act or statehood for the District of Columbia, let’s let lawmakers legislate. If their policies fail, voters can remove them every two or six years. If they succeed, voters can reward them. It’s the accountability loop that makes a republic work.

The Founders did not design a system to prevent change. They designed one to channel it. The filibuster, in its modern, silent form, does not channel debate – it freezes it. And a frozen legislature is not a check on power. It is an invitation to power to move elsewhere.

Frank Miele, retired editor of the Daily Inter Lake in Kalispell, Mont., is a columnist for RealClearPolitics. His book “The Media Matrix: What If Everything You Know Is Fake” is available on his Amazon author page. Visit him at HeartlandDiaryUSA.com or follow him on Facebook @HeartlandDiaryUSA and on X/Gettr @HeartlandDiary.