Chris Cillizza: Is The Senate Filibuster On The Brink of Extinction?

"Chris Cillizza discusses a New York Times piece by Carl Hulse that argues the Senate filibuster is on the brink of extinction. Cillizza explores this claim by examining a recent, largely unnoticed event: Senate Republicans, led by John Thune, overrode the Senate parliamentarian’s ruling on a California emissions waiver using only a simple majority—despite it traditionally requiring 60 votes due to the filibuster.

This, Cillizza argues, is a major signal that norms protecting the filibuster are weakening. He traces the filibuster’s history, from its formalization in 1917, to threshold changes in 1975, to Democrats and Republicans both carving out exceptions for judicial nominations over the past decade.

He predicts that with key opponents of reform like Joe Manchin and Kyrsten Sinema leaving the Senate, Democrats may finally eliminate the legislative filibuster the next time they have a majority. He also flags the upcoming “one big beautiful bill” to fund Donald Trump’s agenda—passed under budget reconciliation rules—as another key test of whether the filibuster will be honored or further eroded."

" 

Source:Chris Cillizza with a look at the Senate cloture rule.

From Chris Cillizza

The sun is finally back out in Washington, so that means it must be another slow news day in the nation's capital, because I'm writing a piece about not just Congress, (which could put any insomniacs convention to sleep) but the Senate filibuster in particular, (which could put any convention of insomniacs conventions to sleep) and the possible future about it. But hey, I'm Congressional junky myself: so what the hell. 

So it only took Chris Cilliza about 7 minutes, or more, of his 10 minute video here, to get into what this is really about. The California environmental laws I believe was just a test, or dry run, a workout, a practice, to get to what Senate Majority John Thune and company are really considering here. The Big Ugly Debt Bomb (that MAGA calls the Big Beautiful Bill) But I have a theory that explains why I think Mr. Cilliza might be wrong here.

So, if you are not asleep yet from this, I congratulate you, because it's important, even if it dull enough to put a team of insomniacs to sleep. But if you are still trying to sleep after seeing this, maybe this will help. I'm just going to give a possible scenario for what could happen if Senate Republicans can't agree on what to cut to pay for the House Republican Big Ugly Debt Bomb and they get stuck somewhere between trying to pay for their own bill and not trying to pay for anything and just putting $3 trillion on the national debt: 

So if that happens and the Senate Parliamentarian rules that this bill violates Congressional reconciliation and the Majority Leader simply just tries to overrule the Parliamentarian with a simple majority, Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer still has 1, big, play, in his playbook, that he could call, that every Senate Democrat would back him on and maybe even 2-3 Republicans as well. The Majority Leader brings his motion to the floor to overrule the Parliamentarian on reconciliation, the Minority Leader simply officially objects to that on the floor:

"The Minority Leader can object on the floor if the Majority Leader attempts to override the Senate Parliamentarian with a simple majority vote. The Senate rules, particularly those related to standing rules and cloture, are designed to protect the rights of the minority, and the nuclear option provides a mechanism for them to challenge such actions." 

From the Senate.Gov. 

And guess what: you need 60 votes to overcome any objection on the floor by any Senator, not just the Majority or Minority Leader. 

But here's why I think we may not get to this point: 

Senate Republicans, including Rand Paul, Ron Johnson, Josh Hawley, I believe even Ted Cruz (no one's moderates) are already saying that the House bill can't pass in the Senate. They don't have enough votes to even pass it with 50 senators and the Vice President. They're saying it's too big, borrows too much money. And Senator Hawley, as well as Susan Collins, and Lisa Murkowski, don't like the Medicaid cuts as well. 

And this could all just be political talk and they could go down faster than a deadman in a championship fight. But even if that last part is true, Chuck Schumer could just object to the overrule motion made by John Thune, to override the Parliamentarian, because their bill violates reconciliation and Thune would need 60 votes to bypass that objection.  

You can follow me on Threads.

You can also see this post on WordPress.