On March 16th, in an ABC News interview with President Joe Biden, Biden expressed his support for changing the filibuster rules. While he doesn’t mention removing the action entirely, he does bring to light its need for reform. He explains, “I don’t think you have to eliminate the filibuster, you have to [make it] what it used to be… when you had to stand up and command the floor” (ABCNews). Biden contends the current filibuster rules are faulty because they too easily allow minority parties to block bills. So, to fix this, its rules should be altered to how they were a few decades ago, which he names, the “talking filibuster.”
A filibuster is a political strategy in which a senator advocates for hours on end to delay efforts to vote for a bill (history.com). Since its creation in the mid-1800’s its rules have varied, however, its unique leverage for minority parties in the Senate remains the same. In the mid-1900s (the time Biden refers to in his interview), senators had to continuously speak on the senate floor in order to sustain challenge to legislation. Additionally, only one bill could be under consideration during this time, as the senate floor was given full attention to whomever was speaking. However, in the early 1970s, the Senate changed the rules so that filibusters could be “silent” — parties could now debate multiple issues at once outside of the actual senate floor. According to a study conducted at UCLA, in the 1950s, there was an average of one filibuster per Congress. After the 70's, that number spiked, with 137 filibusters by 2010.
On Thursday, Biden held his first press conference as President where he also expressed his support for a filibuster reform. He stated, “I strongly support moving in that direction,” when asked if the U.S. should go back to “talking filibusters.” He explained that minority parties have far too much power and that the number of filibusters has gotten too high in the last few decades.
With strong Republican opposition to the filibuster and moderate Democrats backing Biden, he believes it won't be too difficult for him to conjure the support necessary to pass reform. Although Biden himself won’t get to vote on this, his influence as President will hopefully bring the caucus to a unified decision where Vice President Kamala Harris can then cast the final vote.
Questions to Consider:
1. Do you believe the filibuster should be reformed?
2. Why is Biden so heavily against the "silent" filibuster that's practiced today?
https://www.history.com/topics/us-government/history-of-the-filibuster
6 comments:
As good as reforming the filibuster sounds, I believe that will not happen within a politically divided nation. I think that each side does not want to change the filibuster as it will give them power, if they become the minority party. It stops the other side from pushing their agenda on the nation. I believe that Biden would be acting too soon and increase the divide. He should instead work to make unity which can then result in the reforming of the filibuster.
I do see the value of a filibuster as a means of protecting minority parties against majority ones. This helps explain why it was introduced in the first place as in the beginning of American government, there was the strong belief that the majority party should not hold all the power. However, over the decades, the filibuster has been diluted to what it once was. Now it is used as a means of stalling and stagnating legislative progress with congressmen often using ridiculous means of holding up the filibuster. The filibuster is no longer used as a means of protection for the minority party to get their voice heard and is simply used to delay what the opponent party hopes to achieve. Thus, I do believe that the filibuster should be reformed as it is overused and lost its original purpose. With Biden addressing the problem, I am hopeful that his issue will gain significant exposure and hopefully be resolved. Part of the reason why I believe that Biden is so against the filibuster is partly due to his position and experience within the Democratic party. As a senator since 1973, a vice president and now president all under the Democratic party, he has had much experience attempting to deal with filibuster attempts by the opposing party on democratic legislation. It seems that as president, he finally has the position of possibly inciting change.
This is just another example of blatant hypocrisy from both sides of the aisle doing what is politically expedient. Biden is in favor of reforming the filibuster simply because his party is in the majority, just as Trump urged McConnell to get rid of it during his presidency because Democrats kept blocking legislation that he wanted passed. In fact, Biden himself had no problem defending the filibuster 15 years ago when Republicans were in the majority during the Bush administration. Either way, with two Democrats opposing the ending of the filibuster, it will likely not happen as no GOP members are going vote with Democrats. Democrats have to understand that changing the filibuster will also eventually affect them as well; when the pendulum of power swings the other way, they may regret their decision.
I do not think the filibuster should be reformed because it is only used for means of preventing legislation from getting passed. It used to be used for good to help minority parties have a voice against majority parties. The majority party at the time will likely push for it, but it does not help the minority party at all, and vice versa. I think Biden is so against it today because he does not want to create a bigger divide between both parties. He has the power to make change with a filibuster, which can inevitably end badly because it will create more of a divide , whereas he should be working to make the parties come together. The filibuster lost its initial intent of giving the minority party a bigger voice which is why I do not think it should be reformed.
I agree with Liam that eliminating the filibuster is not truly a realistic goal. The filibuster is too valuable to both parties, as Republicans and Democrats know what it's like to be a minority in the Senate. As irritating as the filibuster is when it's used to block a bill you support, there are other times when people are thankful for the filibuster that prevents legislation they disagree with.
The filibuster is difficult because it limits the efficiency of Congress and ultimately reduces Congress' power as a whole. Sometimes, it feels like the Congress accomplishes very little because of how often the filibuster and other methods are used to block and slow the passage of important legislation. At this point, the President is so much more powerful that the Senate because there are less restrictions on the President's power.
Post a Comment