Trump remains focused on killing the filibuster, making it tougher for Democrats to resist his agenda

WASHINGTON — With another potential congressional budget fight looming in January, President Donald Trump is continuing to press Senate Republicans to abolish the chamber’s longstanding filibuster rule that promotes bipartisan buy-in for major pieces of legislation to pass.

Trump was unsuccessful in his push for Senate Republicans to employ "the nuclear option” and get rid of the chamber’s 60-vote threshold during the recent 43-day shutdown, but he has not backed down from his demand that the rule be removed to provide an easier path to pass remaining parts of his agenda along purely partisan lines.

"If we had the filibuster terminated, this would never happen again,” Trump said from the Oval Office after signing the bill to reopen the federal government on Nov. 12. "And we should be able to pass great, really great legislation. So I say terminate the filibuster.”

While the president has faced little pushback from the GOP-controlled Congress during his second term, the filibuster is one area where he has faced some resistance, underscoring the longstanding belief among generations of lawmakers that the rule acts as a guardrail against pure partisan rule.

Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-S.D.) and House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.), in public comments to reporters have both cautioned that changing the rules could backfire on Republicans when Democrats are in control of the Senate.

"I understand desperate times call for desperate measures. I also understand that traditionally, we’ve seen that as an important safeguard,” Johnson told reporters on Nov. 3.

Thune has repeatedly said there are not enough votes among Senate Republicans to lift the rule, and in January, in his first speech as the newly-selected Senate Republican Leader, he vowed to uphold the rule.

"One of my priorities as leader will be to ensure that the Senate stays the Senate,” Thune said in a floor speech. "That means preserving the legislative filibuster, the Senate rule that today has perhaps the greatest impact on preserving the founders' visions of the United States Senate.”

Three-fifths requirement

The filibuster dates back to 1806, when the Senate eliminated a rule that only required a simple majority from the chamber to cut off debate on an issue. With the requirement no longer in place, the minority party often used their floor speeches to deliver marathon speeches and delay action on a bill or "talk a bill to death,” according to the U.S. Senate Historical Office.

Currently it takes a three-fifths majority vote, or 60 of 100 senators, to end debate on a measure. Neither party has had 60 votes outright since 1971, when Democrats held 61 seats in the chamber, according to Senate records, meaning the majority party has always required some level of bipartisan cooperation from the minority party to pass major legislation.

Both parties have used the Senate’s budget reconciliation process as a way to forgo the 60-vote threshold and pass major packages along party lines, including the Trump-backed "Big, Beautiful Bill” passed in May that included changes to the tax code and funding for immigration enforcement. But there are limits to the types of legislation that can pass through this process, and lawmakers are only allowed to use it once every fiscal year.

Trump is not alone in pushing to remove the filibuster. In June 2022, President Joe Biden urged Senate Democrats to nix the rules after the U.S. Supreme Court overturned the landmark Roe v. Wade case that legalized abortion nationwide. Biden argued that the Senate should codify Roe v. Wade’s protections into law, but Democrats fell short of their push when Sens. Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.) and Kyrsten Sinema (D-Ariz.) expressed opposition.

There have also been some changes to the filibuster requirement passed by both parties. In 2013, Democrats voted to eliminate the 60-vote threshold to approve cabinet members and other executive branch appointments. In 2017, Republicans voted to lift the filibuster rules for Supreme Court nominees, allowing Trump appointees Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh to gain approval by a simple majority.

The filibuster has been able to withstand previous attempts at removal, in large part because of partisan motivations, said Christopher Malone, a professor of political science and associate provost at Farmingdale State College.

"For all the lofty rhetoric ... it’s always discussed in terms of ‘Oh well this is a sign of bipartisanship,’ I think the bigger point in all of this is maybe the senatorial equivalent of the golden rule, ‘If we do it now, we’re going to be in the minority at some point and they’re going to do it us,’ " Malone said in a phone interview.

Trump, Malone said, is likely trying to get rid of the filibuster because he is a term-limited president, looking to swiftly pass more pieces of his agenda before next year's midterm elections.

"They are concerned with protecting the institution," Malone said of the Senate, "He’s focused on protecting the short-term goals of his presidency."

'License for paralysis'

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.), has previously expressed support for changing the rules to pass voting rights protection laws, but in other floor speeches has also come to the defense of the filibuster. When asked about Trump’s push recently, he dismissed the idea, telling reporters his message to Trump was: "Stop the bull."

Even as Thune and Schumer and other senate leaders have spoken out against outright eliminating the filibuster, the issue is reportedly emerging as a key concern among Trump’s MAGA base of supporters, who in red-state Senate races in Texas, Kentucky, South Carolina and Georgia, are urging GOP candidates to support removing the rule, according to a recent report in Politico.

Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent has also inserted himself into the conversation, writing a Nov. 23 op-ed piece in The Washington Post that reiterated Trump’s calls, saying in the modern era, "Major legislation is now passed only through reconciliation, executive fiat or brinksmanship.”

"For generations, the filibuster has been romanticized as the Senate’s guardian of deliberation,” Bessent wrote. "In reality, it is a historical accident that has evolved into a standing veto for the minority and a license for paralysis. What once seemed like a dignified brake on hasty lawmaking now blocks even routine governance.”

Bessent, asked during an appearance on NBC’s "Meet the Press” last Sunday whether he believed there would be enough votes to end the filibuster, cited the upcoming expiration date for the short-term spending bill that reopened the U.S. government after the 43-day shutdown.

"Well, we will see come Jan. 30,” he said.

By Laura Figueroa Hernandez

laura.figueroa@newsday.com@Laura_Figueroa

Laura Figueroa Hernandez is the White House correspondent and previously covered New York City politics and government. She joined Newsday in 2012 after covering state and local politics for The Miami Herald.