To truly understand the U.S. Senate, it’s important to acquaint yourself with the filibuster. With strong supporters and fierce opponents, the filibuster seems to always be the subject of intense political debate. Its name evokes memories of senators giving speeches on the Senate floor for hours on end to stall. But there’s much more to the filibuster than that. Is it a tool of partisan obstruction or the defining feature of the Senate? Does it undermine the democratic process or force bipartisanship and compromise?
Today’s Civics short is designed for middle schoolers but like all sugary cereals it’s also fun for adults.
Filibuster Civics Short_FINAL.mp3: Audio automatically transcribed by Sonix
Filibuster Civics Short_FINAL.mp3: this mp3 audio file was automatically transcribed by Sonix with the best speech-to-text algorithms. This transcript may contain errors.
(speaker):
Civics 101 is supported in part by the Corporation for Public Broadcasting.
Nick Capodice:
Hey, I'm Nick Capodice.
Hannah McCarthy:
And I'm Hannah McCarthy. Nick, do you know anything about the Senate filibuster?
Nick Capodice:
I do. But first and foremost, I know it comes from the Dutch word meaning "pirate." Do you know a pirates' favorite letter?
Hannah McCarthy:
Arrrrrrrrr!
Nick Capodice:
"R" be fine. But his first love be the "C."
Hannah McCarthy:
Ok, well, it's a good thing that we have Mitch Scacchi and Christina Phillips here to tell us a little bit more about one of the most complicated and controversial topics in American politics on today's Civics Short.
Nick Capodice:
It's designed with middle schoolers in mind, but can be a refresher for those of all ages. Take it away, folks!
"Why hold this vote at all if it's destined for failure?"
"Diane, the answer's one word. It's the filibuster. The reason that it can't pass is because of the Senate filibuster. Even if all the Democrats...."
"...60 votes to end a filibuster on legislation or 51?"
"If we can end it with 51, we would have no problem...."
Mitch Scacchi:
Filibuster, filibuster, filibuster. Opponents say it undermines our democracy and the will of the people, while supporters argue it's the cornerstone of the United States Senate and crucial to its success.
Christina Phillips:
You could say it's a hotly debated topic, but what is the filibuster? Hi, I'm Christina.
Mitch Scacchi:
And I'm Mitch. Today on Civics Shorts, we're exploring that pesky, tricky, unique Senate tool commonly known as the filibuster.
Christina Phillips:
Well, let's stop filibustering and get on with this episode.
"And I would go for another 12 hours to try to break Strom Thurmond's record, but I've discovered that there are some limits to filibustering and I'm going to have to go take care of one of those in a few minutes here...."
Mitch Scacchi:
Republican Senator Rand Paul held a debate on the Senate floor for almost 13 hours in 2013 to stall a vote on President Barack Obama's nominee to run the CIA.
Christina Phillips:
13 hours?! Why is a senator allowed to do that?
Mitch Scacchi:
It's called the filibuster. This is any attempt to block or delay Senate action on a bill or other matter. Call it an obstruction tactic.
Christina Phillips:
You can think of it as "talking a bill to death," and it can go on for hours. The senators just keep talking and talking and talking, hoping they can delay the Senate long enough to prevent it from voting on a proposal.
Hannah McCarthy:
"Senator Strom Thurmond spoke for 24 hours and 18 minutes in what would become the longest speaking filibuster in Senate history."
Christina Phillips:
Senators can also filibuster by proposing a laundry list of amendments to bills.
Mitch Scacchi:
Quite frankly, senators don't even have to talk about anything relevant while filibustering.
"I do so like green eggs and ham. Thank you, thank you, Sam I Am."
Christina Phillips:
See? Not relevant at all, but he could carry out his, quote unquote "debate," as long as he pleased. Luckily, there is a way for the Senate to break a filibuster.
Mitch Scacchi:
That's right. This is called cloture, which means you're ending debate and taking a vote. It's the only formal way to break a filibuster.
Christina Phillips:
The Senate's cloture rule, known as Senate Rule 22, requires what's known as a "supermajority" to invoke cloture, or end debate.
Mitch Scacchi:
There are different kinds of majorities in the Senate. With 100 senators, a simple majority is one more than half of the Senate, or 51 votes. A three-fifths supermajority is 60 votes.
Christina Phillips:
This three-fifths supermajority, or 60 votes, is what it takes to invoke cloture, break a filibuster, and end debate.
Mitch Scacchi:
Once cloture is invoked, the Senate can debate for another 30 hours, but after that they have to stop and vote.
Christina Phillips:
It's very difficult to reach the 60 votes required for cloture. Control of the Senate often goes back and forth between Democrats and Republicans, so the majority party typically has less than 60 members. So the parties have to work together to end a filibuster.
Mitch Scacchi:
But in recent years, the political parties have become more divided, and so filibusters have become more common, almost expected.
Christina Phillips:
So most things in the Senate need 60 votes to pass rather than the simple majority of 51.
Mitch Scacchi:
So far, we've been discussing the "talking filibuster," where a senator gets up and speaks for 13 hours to stall. But there's another kind of filibuster.
"In the 70s, in the interests of efficiency, senators agreed to no longer require talking filibusters. Instead, now, if you just signal your intent to filibuster, and have 41 votes on your side, a bill...."
Mitch Scacchi:
This is the virtual filibuster. It's not actually a real filibuster, but just the threat of one. Think of it as one side suggesting that it will filibuster and the other side believing it. With the parties so divided, senators operate under the assumption that every proposal will be filibustered.
Christina Phillips:
Senators threatened to filibuster much more often because they can achieve the same results, like stopping a bill or a presidential appointment, without having to go through the time and effort of speaking indefinitely on the Senate floor.
Mitch Scacchi:
The filibuster, whether it's the threat of one or the real deal, has a deep history of obstruction.
Christina Phillips:
But where did it come from?
Mitch Scacchi:
Not from the founders or the Constitution. In 1805, Vice President Aaron Burr suggested that the Senate simplify its rulebook. The following year, the Senate took his advice and, as a consequence, removed a provision from its rules that would have allowed a simple majority to force a vote on a proposal.
Christina Phillips:
So the filibuster was a product of Senate housekeeping?
Mitch Scacchi:
Yeah, I know. And over time, the filibuster and the right to unlimited debate stuck, becoming key features of the already unique Senate. And now they have quite the reputation.
Christina Phillips:
The filibuster was used extensively by segregationist senators to block civil rights legislation during the first half of the 20th century.
Mitch Scacchi:
It's also been used more recently to block presidential nominees from appointment.
"Over the six decades before I took office, only 20 presidential nominees to executive positions had to overcome filibusters. In just under five years since I took office, nearly 30 nominees have been treated this way...."
Christina Phillips:
The Constitution requires the Senate approve the president's choices for high-level government positions, like justices of the Supreme Court and Cabinet members.
Mitch Scacchi:
It's common for senators to filibuster the most important and controversial presidential nominees to prevent their appointments.
Christina Phillips:
But the Senate has adapted to this.
Mitch Scacchi:
It's called...[siren noise]...the nuclear option. This is even more complicated than the filibuster itself, which is why it'll probably be a whole other Civics Short.
Christina Phillips:
The nuclear option is basically a procedure that allows the Senate to change its own rules without debate and with a simple majority of 51 votes. The change sets a new precedent for the Senate to follow. The nuclear option has been used controversially to break filibusters.
Mitch Scacchi:
Here's an example. As we mentioned, Senate Rule 22 states that cloture to end a filibuster takes a three-fifths supermajority, or 60 votes. In 2013, Democratic Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid used the nuclear option for the first time to propose that cloture be invoked instead by a simple majority, or 51 votes, for all presidential nominations except to the Supreme Court. The presiding officer said, no, because that violates Rule 22. A simple majority of the Senate then voted to overturn this decision and change the rules.
Christina Phillips:
Four years later, the nuclear option was triggered again, this time ending a filibuster with a simple majority of 51 votes for a Supreme Court nomination.
Mitch Scacchi:
"And to that historic move in the Senate. Republicans triggering the so-called "nuclear option." That sets up a vote tomorrow now to confirm Supreme Court nominee Neil Gorsuch by a simple majority...."
Christina Phillips:
So why's the filibuster only a feature of the Senate? What about the House of Representatives?
Mitch Scacchi:
Under Article One, section five of the Constitution, "Each House may determine the Rules of its Proceedings." Basically, the House and Senate get to decide their own rules. The House has set limits on debate, but the Senate, on the other hand, has not.
Christina Phillips:
And what does the future look like for the filibuster?
Mitch Scacchi:
Who knows? There are those who want to keep it, those who want to eliminate it, and those who want to reform it.
"The 60-vote threshold is the reason why huge pillars of domestic policy don't oscillate back and forth every time a different party wins a majority...."
"At the end of the day, we have to end the filibuster. It is just unfair and undemocratic for a minority of the Senate to prevent what the majority of people want in this country...."
Christina Phillips:
Supporters say the filibuster makes the Senate the unique body it was designed to be, helps the Senate resist the whims of public opinion, protects the Senate minority from the tyranny of the majority, and forces bipartisanship and compromise.
Mitch Scacchi:
But its critics say the filibuster undermines the democratic process and representative government, defies the will of the people, provides too much power to the minority party, and is a tool of partisan obstruction and makes it too difficult to get anything done.
Christina Phillips:
What would it take to get rid of it?
Mitch Scacchi:
Besides ratifying a constitutional amendment, there are two ways to reform or get rid of the filibuster. One is for the Senate to formally change its own rules. This would require a two-thirds supermajority vote of senators present, or likely 67 votes. The other is to use the nuclear option. With a simple majority of 51 votes, the Senate could essentially change its rules to allow a simple majority to invoke cloture and break all filibusters.
Christina Phillips:
So it's complicated.
Nick Capodice:
This episode was produced by Mitchell Scacchi, with help from Jacqui Fulton, Christina Phillips, Hannah McCarthy, and Nick Capodice.
Hannah McCarthy:
Erika Janik is our executive producer. Music in this episode by Blue Dot Sessions.
Nick Capodice:
You can listen to more Civics 101 at Civics101podcast.org. Civics 101 is supported in part by the Corporation for Public Broadcasting and is a production of NHPR, New Hampshire Public Radio.
Sonix is the world’s most advanced automated transcription, translation, and subtitling platform. Fast, accurate, and affordable.
Automatically convert your mp3 files to text (txt file), Microsoft Word (docx file), and SubRip Subtitle (srt file) in minutes.
Sonix has many features that you'd love including automated translation, transcribe multiple languages, enterprise-grade admin tools, world-class support, and easily transcribe your Zoom meetings. Try Sonix for free today.