It’s time to end the filibuster

The Washington Post ^ | 11/23/2025 6:00 a.m. EST | Scott Bessent, U.S. Treasury Secretary.

[E. Pluribus Unum]

The American people are just now emerging from the longest and most devastating government shutdown in U.S. history. And while the blame lies squarely with Senate Democrats, we cannot ignore the weapon they used to hold the country hostage: the legislative filibuster. In January, when spending considerations again come due, if Democrats once again choose to shut down the government, then Republicans should immediately end the filibuster.

By wielding the filibuster, which requires a 60-vote Senate supermajority to pass legislation, Democrats inflicted tremendous harm on the nation, including: $11 billion in permanent economic damage; an estimated 1.5 percentage points in lost GDP growth in the fourth quarter of fiscal 2025; 9,500 canceled flights; and the paychecks of 1.4 million federal workers held for ransom by the left’s demands.

For generations, the filibuster has been romanticized as the Senate’s guardian of deliberation. In reality, it is a historical accident that has evolved into a standing veto for the minority and a license for paralysis. What once seemed like a dignified brake on hasty lawmaking now blocks even routine governance. It’s time for Republicans to acknowledge that the filibuster no longer serves the country — and to be prepared to end it.

The filibuster is not in the Constitution. The Framers envisioned debate, but they expected majority rule. The modern filibuster traces back to 1806, when the Senate, on the advice of then-former vice president Aaron Burr, deleted the “previous question” motion from its rulebook. That deletion wasn’t a philosophical embrace of unlimited debate; it was a housekeeping measure that inadvertently removed the chamber’s mechanism for cutting off debate by majority vote. Only later did senators discover they could exploit the gap to delay or block action.

[E. Pluribus Unum]

Grok Summary

The U.S. just endured the longest, most damaging government shutdown in history, caused by Senate Democrats using the legislative filibuster to block funding unless their demands were met.

The shutdown cost $11 billion permanently, shaved ~1.5% off Q4 2025 GDP growth, canceled 9,500 flights, and left 1.4 million federal workers unpaid.Bessent argues the filibuster is not in the Constitution, is a historical accident (created in 1806 when the Senate accidentally removed the simple mechanism to end debate), and has become a minority veto that paralyzes routine governance.

Both parties have already eliminated it for judicial and executive nominations (Democrats in 2013, Republicans in 2017) without the Republic collapsing.He urges Republicans to end the legislative filibuster entirely if Democrats force another shutdown in January 2026 when the next spending deadline hits.

Key points:

• The filibuster no longer forces compromise; it enables total obstruction.
• Democrats have called it a “Jim Crow relic” and will kill it the moment they regain power anyway.
• Retaining it unilaterally is naive “prisoner’s dilemma” thinking; Republicans are disarming themselves while Democrats won’t.
• A credible threat to abolish it may actually preserve it longer by forcing Democrats to negotiate.

Bottom line: If Democrats shut the government down again on Jan. 30, Republicans must immediately eliminate the filibuster, restore majority rule, and govern.

A “procedural fossil” should not be allowed to hold the country hostage.

[DownInFlames]

Absolutely not! The filibuster is the only way the minority party in the senate can block legislation that it deems harmful. The GOP will not be in power forever.

[Flaming Conservative]

Except with Republicans voting with democrats, it could really hurt us. We’re hanged if we do and hanged if we don’t.

[Vermont Lt]

I am glad i am old.

I don’t think I will like the new republic that these clowns envision.

It would be better if we simply elected people interested in serving the public interest, not their own.

[unclebankster]

I’m not for ending it, but changing it so Senators have to “talk & talk” like Strom Thurmond or Cory Booker did.

When they tire & run out of hot air, the bill moves forward.

[Governor Dinwiddie]

Bingo. Exactly. Spot on.

History is replete with times the filibuster has saved America from disaster.

[Paladin2]

The filibuster should go back to pre-Democratic Senator Walter Mondale and sit at 67 votes.

ANY legislation should be done with the backing of the vast preponderance of the Peeps.

We already have no shortage of Laws.

[foreverfree]

We’re hanged if we do and hanged if we don’t.

ROFLOL, then thinking, "on second thought ..."

[rottndog]

There is absolutely nothing in Article I that requires a supermajority to pass simple legislation, including a budget (although we haven’t actually had a budget in many years).

If democrats truly believe in democracy, 50%+1 governance, they would support ending the filibuster too.

[Bruce Campbells Chin]

I think they’re right. It should be ended.

[Shady]

If the WAPOO wants it ended, DO NOT END IT!

[Ransomed]

I generally agree with you that the filibuster keeps a brake on the government, especially given the 17th. But what if the next time the filibuster is nuked it’s because the dems are doing it to create 2 or 3 more reliably democrat states? That would give them 4 or 6 more dem senators and pretty much ensure that they won’t lose the senate again. I don’t know the answer.

Freegards

[TheDon]

“The GOP will not be in power forever.”

Then let the voters get what they voted for “good and hard”. Elections should have consequences for good and bad.

[FreedomNotSafety]

If the Republicans killed the filibuster they would do it in the weakest way possible. The Dems otoh would kill it and reorder our entire government and way of life and entrench themselves in power for eternity

So… if the pubbies do this the must be prepared to maximize it. They are not and Bessent is a tool.

[TheDon]

“It would be better if we simply elected people interested in serving the public interest, not their own.”

That won’t happen without constitutional amendments. For instance, restricting campaign donations to those who can vote for a candidate .

[Lurker]

Absolutely not. Bring back the real filibuster. Make them talk for hours and hours.

L

[hanamizu]

The Framers envisioned debate...The modern filibuster traces back to 1806

---

Lots of the ‘Framers’ were still around and, in fact serving in government in 1806.

[I-ambush]

If I recall correctly, Strom Thurmond, during his filibuster,, periodically walked over to the cloakroom door, where an aide held a urinal so he could relieve himself without technically yielding the Senate floor.

[Drew68]

The problem with ending the filibuster is Republicans won't do anything with all of this awesome power once they have it.

The Democrats will though.

[Brian Griffin]

They don’t even have legislation written up.

Newt Gingrich came prepared.