Kill the Filibuster Before It Kills America
Let the majority govern — and make the extremists own their agenda.
by Jeremy Novak
The filibuster has reached almost mythical status as a preserver of freedom and promoter of compromise.
The reality is so much different. Its origin story and most famous utilizations are mired in our racist past (at least, until Corey Booker changed the script on April 1, 2025).
While it’s true that the filibuster forces legislation to be passable and makes truly revolting legislation unpassable, it also shields lawmakers from political reality, which entrenches the status quo. The filibuster is an easy crutch to lean on to excuse inaction and blame the other side. With it, politicians can talk a tough game to get elected, but never follow through with passing laws.
Without a filibuster option, lawmakers would be more pressured to take action and would be more accountable for these actions. Ending the filibuster is the best way to ensure the government is responsive to the people that elect them, because there would be no more excuse for a majority to not take action.
Therefore, ending the filibuster when Republicans are in power is exactly the right thing to do. It will give Republicans the power to pass any legislation they want.
Ending the filibuster would be good for Democrats
You might wonder why this is a good thing.
It’s because the Republican agenda is not popular with the American people. Having no filibuster to fall back on will either force them to moderate or result in them getting voted out of office.
Plus, consider that laws can be repealed. If the Republicans pass unpopular legislation and were subsequently voted out, Democrats could simply repeal that legislation and pass their own laws.
It’s true that all of this would apply to the Democrats as well, but in a world without a filibuster Democrats would have the advantage, because the issues they focus on tend to be more popular. From abortion, to health care, to taxes, to voting rights, polling shows that respondents tend towards the Democratic positions.
Republicans already enjoy a major advantage in the archaic governing system we currently use. This is evident in the Electoral College and the structure of the Senate. Both are designed to empower the minority. These systems give the smaller, less populated states a larger say in the government than in a system where a simple majority rules.
I’m all for allowing the minority to have some say in the running of our government. I think it’s a good thing to water down the majority's power so that they can’t run roughshod over the minority.
But the filibuster takes this to an extreme level. The Senate already gives disproportionate power to smaller states. The fact that Montana has the same number of votes in the Senate as California is a testament to this. Why give the minority even more power to stifle the majority?
When a majority wins, they should have power. They should be able to take advantage of the mandate they are given from the electorate and pass the legislation they want.
And with power comes responsibility. The majority will be accountable for the legislation they pass. If the legislation is ineffective or unwanted, the majority risks being voted out. So they better use their majority wisely.
This is exactly why it’s important to end the filibuster especially while the current brand of Republicans are in power. They have an extreme and unpopular agenda, but they are able to hide behind the filibuster to avoid accountability for any action they might take. Instead, they rely on the President as a proxy, who acts like a dictator through the use of sham Executive Orders. They pass the accountability off on Donald Trump, who’s crazy enough to try to implement the extreme agenda.
If they had the ability to pass their preferred legislation through a simple majority, they would either 1) not bring the legislation because they knew how unpopular it was; 2) moderate it to be more palatable to the American people; or 3) pass it and face the wrath of the voters.
The power of a simple majority demands accountability
If you don’t’ believe me, consider the budget proposals in the House. The budget is not automatically subject to the filibuster rules. Through the “budget reconciliation” process, a simple Senate majority can pass a budget. In fact, that’s probably the only way in this era that any party in power can pass a budget.
And what we are seeing from Senate Republicans is borderline shocking. Stalwart conservatives Senators like Missouri’s Josh Hawley and Wisconsin’s Ron Johnson are decrying the proposed budget’s cutting of Medicaid and blowing up of the national debt. They are speaking out about this because they know they are accountable since it’s subject to a simple majority vote.
If the budget was subject to the filibuster rule, they could hide in the background and blame the Democrats. With a simple majority vote, however, they are forced to take a public stance and actually vote for their constituents’ preferences or risk being voted out.
Josh Hawley and Ron Johnson have made the political calculation that they are safer by publicly decrying the extreme House Republican budget.
You would see things play out similarly with other divisive issues, such as abortion. Do you really think Senate Republicans would vote to pass a full abortion ban if they could do it easily with a simple majority? It’s very unlikely.
But let’s say they did. What would happen? First, it would likely be challenged in court, so could take months if not years to take effect. It’s very likely that the next midterm elections happened before it got resolved, in which case the Democrats could take power and repeal the law. And even if such an unpopular law was fully implemented before the next midterms, the effects felt by the public would increase the chances of the Democrats taking control of the Senate in midterms.
All of this would be true of Democrats as well. They would be fully accountable for their legislation and could face defeat in the Senate as a result. But Democrats have the American people on their side on most issues. They don’t really have much more room to moderate, so they would be at less risk of being voted out.
Put up or shut up
Admittedly, one big risk with this could be that Republicans just go full-on authoritarian and pass legislation to destroy democracy. They could end voting rights for millions of people, suppress dissent, and establish a Trumpian monarchy. But as I noted above with abortion, this would be challenged in court and take years to implement, by which time Democrats could take back the Senate.
Do most of their constituents really want this? Without the filibuster to shield them, they’d have to decide. They could no longer hide behind Donald Trump’s madness.
I’m tired of waiting to see what kind of country America wants to be. If a large minority is fine with authoritarianism and can impose it, let’s find out if the majority still cares to stop it. The clearest way to do that? End the filibuster and force a real decision.
It’s time for the majority of the American people to decide America’s fate, and removing the filibuster will speed this process up.
So call your Republican Senators and tell them to vote to end the filibuster. Now.
Every membership helps keep The Banter alive and independent. We’re building a community of smart, fearless readers who won’t back down from the truth. Join today for 50% off:
Read the latest for Banter Members:
 | A guest post by
|