Category: The Hill
Dem Nominee in Tennessee Special Election: Asking About My Defund Police Tweets Is a ‘Cable News Talking Point’
The Democratic nominee for the special election for Tennessee’s deep-red Seventh Congressional District, Aftyn Behn, fumbled over her words as she fielded a question on her since-deleted tweets calling to defund police. Asking about the posts, Behn said, is a “cable news talking point.”
The post Dem Nominee in Tennessee Special Election: Asking About My Defund Police Tweets Is a ‘Cable News Talking Point’ appeared first on .
Pentagon goes after Mark Kelly
Welcome to The Hill’s Defense & NatSec newsletter {beacon} Defense &National Security Defense &National Security The Big Story Pentagon goes after Mark Kelly The Pentagon said Monday that it has received “serious allegations of misconduct” against Sen. Mark Kelly (D-Ariz.) and launched a review after the senator joined a handful of other lawmakers calling…
Schiff: 2025 Thanksgiving turkey price up ‘whopping 40 percent’
Sen. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.) said Sunday the price of this year’s Thanksgiving turkey is set to rise a “whopping 40 percent.” “So, we’re coming up on Thanksgiving, and it’s as good a time as any to try to take stock of Donald Trump’s promise to reduce costs for the American people. Well, grocery prices are…
Carville urges Democrats to run on ‘pure economic rage’
Democratic strategist James Carville is pushing Democrats to run on “pure economic rage” in an opinion piece for The New York Times. “It is abundantly clear even to me that the Democratic Party must now run on the most populist economic platform since the Great Depression,” Carville said in the piece published Monday. “It is…
Noem ends temporary protected status for Myanmar migrants
Myanmar is the latest country to have its temporary protected status terminated this year by the Trump administration
Marjorie Taylor Greene’s exit from Congress could spell trouble for Speaker Johnson
Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene’s (R-Ga.) stunning decision to resign from Congress sets off a political grenade for Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) as he works to keep his grip on an already delicate GOP majority in the House. Greene’s decision comes at a pivotal moment for Johnson, who is counting on every Republican vote to pass…
How the Senate’s phony ‘deliberation’ crushes working Americans
The United States Senate is broken, and most Americans know it — including President Donald Trump. A chamber that once passed laws with a simple 51-vote majority, a practice that held for more than a century, now demands 60 votes for nearly anything of consequence.
Defenders call this the “world’s greatest deliberative body,” guarding minority rights. In reality, the 60-vote threshold is a rule the Senate invented in the last century — and one it can discard tomorrow.
The filibuster transformed from a test of stamina into a tool for avoiding hard votes — and, today, a convenient excuse to delay or kill the America First agenda.
Article I lists exactly seven situations that require a supermajority: overriding vetoes, ratifying treaties, convicting in impeachment, expelling members, proposing constitutional amendments, and two obscure quorum rules. Passing ordinary legislation is not on the list.
The Senate’s tradition of unlimited debate — the seed of modern filibusters — wasn’t designed to create a supermajority requirement. It was an accident.
In 1806, on Aaron Burr’s suggestion that the Senate rulebook was cluttered, the chamber deleted the “previous question” motion, the mechanism the House still uses to end debate and vote. No one understood the implications at the time. Filibusters didn’t appear until the 1830s, and even then they were rare because they required real endurance. Senators had to speak nonstop, often for days, until they collapsed or yielded.
How the filibuster became a weapon
Everything changed in 1917. After 11 anti-war senators filibustered Woodrow Wilson’s bill to arm merchant ships on the eve of World War I, the public revolted. Wilson demanded action. The Senate responded by creating Rule XXII — the first cloture rule — allowing two-thirds of senators to end debate.
Instead of restraining obstruction, the rule supercharged it. For the first time, a minority didn’t need to speak until exhaustion. They only needed to threaten it. The majority now had to assemble a supermajority to progress.
The filibuster transformed from a test of stamina into a tool for avoiding hard votes — and, today, a convenient excuse to delay or kill the America First agenda.
The Senate has rewritten its filibuster rule many times since. In 1975, it lowered the cloture threshold from two-thirds to three-fifths (60 votes). In 2013, Democrats eliminated the filibuster for most presidential nominees; in 2017, Republicans applied that same exception to Supreme Court justices.
These changes all point to the same reality: The filibuster is not a sacred tradition. It is a standing rule, created and amended by simple-majority votes. The Senate can change it again any time.
The myth of ‘unprecedented change’
Filibuster defenders insist that ending the 60-vote rule would be radical.
It wouldn’t. In reality, it would restore the practice that governed the Senate for its first 128 years — unlimited debate, yes, but no supermajority threshold for passing laws.
RELATED: Democrats reject ‘current policy’ — unless it pays their base
DOUGBERRY via iStock/Getty Images
Defenders also claim the filibuster forces compromise. History says otherwise. The biggest legislative achievements of the last century — Social Security, the Civil Rights Act, the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act — all passed when the filibuster was weakened, bypassed, or irrelevant.
What we have now is not deliberation. It is paralysis: a rule that allows 41 senators, representing as little as 11% of the country, to veto the will of the rest. The Senate already protects small states through equal representation and long tenures. Adding a 60-vote requirement for routine governance is not what the framers intended.
The fix
The solution is straightforward. The Senate can return to simple-majority voting for legislation. It can keep unlimited debate if it wishes — but require a real talking filibuster that ends when the minority runs out of arguments or public patience. Or it can leave the system as it is now and watch President Trump’s America First agenda stall for another generation.
The filibuster is not a 230-year constitutional safeguard. It is a 108-year experiment born in 1917 — and it has failed. The Senate invented it. The Senate can un-invent it.
Karp’s Quest to Save the Shire
“You’re killing my family in Palestine!” a protester screamed at Palantir CEO Alex Karp while he was addressing a Silicon Valley conference last April. “The primary source of death in Palestine,” Karp, the Jewish, half-black, progressive, tai chi practitioner shot back, without missing a beat, “is the fact that Hamas has realized there are millions and millions of useful idiots.”
The post Karp’s Quest to Save the Shire appeared first on .
Six Democrats and One Trump Equal Trump Exhaustion Syndrome
WASHINGTON — Six elected beltway Democrats with backgrounds in the military or intelligence are stirring the pot with a video…
Rubio on Ukraine peace talks: ‘Probably the most productive and meaningful meetings so far’
Secretary of State Marco Rubio said Sunday that recent Russia-Ukraine war peace talks were “meaningful” and “productive.” “So, it is in my personal view that we’ve had probably the most productive and meaningful meetings so far in this entire process since we’ve been involved, from the beginning,” Rubio said in Geneva. “We have a very…
