The Filibuster Protects Minority Rights. That Does Not Make It Racist

In a nation where all of us may find ourselves in a minority from time to time and place to place, that is a protection we may all come to rely on.

Share this story

Sen. Elizabeth Warren at a hearing of the Senate Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs Committee, November 28, 2017.

Joshua Roberts/Reuters

Progressives and Democrats have decided that something that gets in the way of their agenda is — stop me if you’ve heard this one before — racist. This time, it’s the filibuster, the rule by which the votes of 60 senators (thus representing a minimum of 30 states) are required to end debate on new laws in the Senate and bring them to a vote. The spin machine is in overdrive:

Democrats such as Warren have happily deployed the filibuster to block new laws themselves hundreds of times in recent years. Perhaps nobody alive today has participated in more filibusters than has Joe Biden, who was a vocal defender of the practice for decades. Warren, for example, participated in filibustering a COVID-relief package in the fall of 2020, and was not heard at the time to be complaining that she was acting in a racist fashion. Why did congressional Republicans eliminate the monetary penalty for violating Obamacare’s individual mandate, but not repeal the mandate itself? Because it required 60 votes in the Senate to overcome a Democratic filibuster and change the law. Indeed, while Republicans may never have had the votes to entirely repeal Barack Obama’s signature health-care bill, many of its provisions survive today because of the 60-vote threshold in the Senate.

Dan McLaughlin

About the Author

Dan McLaughlin

Dan McLaughlin is a senior writer at National Review Online and a fellow at National Review Institute.

Comments

Advertisement

Advertisement