"If America is to be governed competently and fairly — if it is to be governed at all — the filibuster must go.”
Washington, DC — Today, The New York Times Editorial Board called on Congress to end the filibuster in order to govern effectively and pass critical legislation on voting rights and democracy reform. They argue that the modern application of the filibuster is antithetical to governing and reminded readers that historically the filibuster has been used to perpetuate Jim Crow and crush civil rights bills and other efforts to expand and protect civil and voting rights in America.
Some key excerpts from The New York Times editorial board opinion:
- "This is a singular moment for American democracy, if Democrats are willing to seize it. Whatever grand principles have been used to sustain the filibuster over the years, it is clear as a matter of history, theory and practice that it vindicates none of them.”
- "Bipartisan cooperation and debate should be at the heart of the legislative process, but there is little evidence that the filibuster facilitates either.”
- "As Alexander Hamilton wrote in Federalist 22, “What at first sight may seem a remedy, is, in reality, a poison.” Supermajority requirements would serve “to embarrass the administration, to destroy the energy of the government, and to substitute the pleasure, caprice or artifices” of a minority to the “regular deliberations and decisions of a respectable majority.”
- "The filibuster arose only decades later. John C. Calhoun, a senator from South Carolina used it as a means to protect the interests of slavers like himself from a majority. From its beginnings through the middle of the 20th century, when segregationists like Senator Strom Thurmond, also of South Carolina, used the filibuster to try to kill multiple civil-rights bills, the pattern has been clear: It has been used regularly by those who reject inclusive democracy.”
- "If the political reforms in H.R. 1 are not undertaken at the federal level, Republican leaders will continue to entrench minority rule. That’s happening already in states like Wisconsin and North Carolina, where Republican-drawn maps give them large legislative majorities despite winning fewer votes statewide than Democrats.”
- "The perverse result of all this is that it is now easier to block a piece of legislation, which could be repealed in the next Congress, than it is to block a federal judge seeking a lifetime appointment. Any intellectual justification for the filibuster has been gutted by the fact that it doesn’t apply anymore to many important issues before the Senate.”
- "If the choice is between saving the filibuster and saving democracy, it should be an easy call.”
Read the whole piece here.
