Biden Backs ‘Talking Filibuster’ Reform: ‘That’s What It Was Supposed To Be’

Democratic presidential candidate Joe Biden speaks about reopening the country during a speech in Darby, Pennsylvania, on June 17, 2020. (Photo by JIM WATSON/AFP via Getty Images)
Start your day with TPM.
Sign up for the Morning Memo newsletter

President Joe Biden on Tuesday endorsed the notion of making the filibuster, a Senate procedure that essentially requires 60 votes to pass bills instead of a simple majority, more painful to carry out as Republicans routinely weaponize it to kill Democrats’ legislative agenda.

“I don’t think that you have to eliminate the filibuster, you have to do it what it used to be when I first got to the Senate back in the old days,” Biden told ABC News anchor George Stephanopoulos in a pre-taped interview. “You had to stand up and command the floor and you had to keep talking.”

The President asserted that the talking filibuster is “what it was supposed to be” and that the current filibustering process made it too easy to keep the Senate from getting anything done.

“It’s getting to the point where democracy’s having a hard time functioning,” he said.

With blockbuster legislation like the H.R. 1 voting rights bill and the Equality Act on the line that would be dead on arrival in the Senate under the current system, Democrats are looking at ways to reform the filibuster as conservative Democrats like Sens. Joe Manchin (D-WV) and Kyrsten Sinema (D-AZ) refuse to get rid of the procedure wholesale.

Manchin has signaled support for a talking filibuster and making the process “a little bit more painful.”

Latest News

Notable Replies

  1. OLD SCHOOL! If they want to challenge or BLOCK any legislation, take a stand…LITERALLY. Make them stand and talk. Not only will this make Republicans think twice about their action it will also put a face to who is blocking legislation that the public is behind.

  2. Alright let’s do this!

    I do have a question who/what determines 60 votes vs simple majority? Jim Clyburn was on Hayes not too long ago and mentioned reforming the Filibuster so that more bills pass with simple majority.

    Is that possible? Because you could keep the Filibuster, make it painful…I miss the talking Filibuster. While also changing what needs 60vs51 in order to get more bills (infrastructure, min wage, voting rights) passed without even worrying about it.

  3. If Republicans are forced to talk until they drop when it means keeping minorities from voting and having various other equal privileges and rights in our society they’ll gladly do it.

  4. At best, the 60 vote rule assumed that there was some consensus between the parties on the need for governance and what that governance was to do and so a workable compromise was there to be found.
    That doesn’t exist.
    A rule predicated on that assumption should, therefore, also not exist.

Continue the discussion at forums.talkingpointsmemo.com

126 more replies

Participants

Avatar for paulw Avatar for jep07 Avatar for cervantes Avatar for steviedee111 Avatar for becca656 Avatar for dont Avatar for daveyjones64 Avatar for danny Avatar for bonvivant Avatar for 26degreesrising Avatar for gr Avatar for darcy Avatar for ronbyers Avatar for khaaannn Avatar for thunderclapnewman Avatar for tena Avatar for ljb860 Avatar for castor_troy Avatar for enn Avatar for iamsmall Avatar for redpill Avatar for kovie Avatar for Akimbo Avatar for geographyjones

Continue Discussion
Masthead Masthead
Founder & Editor-in-Chief:
Executive Editor:
Managing Editor:
Deputy Editor:
Editor at Large:
General Counsel:
Publisher:
Head of Product:
Director of Technology:
Associate Publisher:
Front End Developer:
Senior Designer: