Scott Bessent is U.S. treasury secretary.
The American people are just now emerging from the longest and most devastating government shutdown in U.S. history. And while the blame lies squarely with Senate Democrats, we cannot ignore the weapon they used to hold the country hostage: the legislative filibuster. In January, when spending considerations again come due, if Democrats once again choose to shut down the government, then Republicans should immediately end the filibuster.
By wielding the filibuster, which requires a 60-vote Senate supermajority to pass legislation, Democrats inflicted tremendous harm on the nation, including: $11 billion in permanent economic damage; an estimated 1.5 percentage points in lost GDP growth in the fourth quarter of fiscal 2025; 9,500 canceled flights; and the paychecks of 1.4 million federal workers held for ransom by the left’s demands.
For generations, the filibuster has been romanticized as the Senate’s guardian of deliberation. 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. It’s time for Republicans to acknowledge that the filibuster no longer serves the country — and to be prepared to end it.
The filibuster is not in the Constitution. The Framers envisioned debate, but they expected majority rule. The modern filibuster traces back to 1806, when the Senate, on the advice of then-former vice president Aaron Burr, deleted the “previous question” motion from its rulebook. That deletion wasn’t a philosophical embrace of unlimited debate; it was a housekeeping measure that inadvertently removed the chamber’s mechanism for cutting off debate by majority vote. Only later did senators discover they could exploit the gap to delay or block action.
In the modern era, merely threatening a filibuster typically forces a 60-vote supermajority to move legislation forward. Defenders of the filibuster argue that it ensures compromise, encourages bipartisanship and protects minority rights. That may have been true decades ago, but it is no longer the case now. Today, the minority party can abuse the filibuster to the point of rendering the Senate almost useless as a deliberative body.
Democrats themselves have recognized this phenomenon. That’s why, in 2013, Majority Leader Harry Reid eliminated the filibuster for presidential nominations other than Supreme Court justices. In 2017, Republicans followed suit for Supreme Court nominations. Each side justified its move as a response to unprecedented obstruction by the other. And each time, the Senate survived. The Republic did not fall. If anything, accountability improved because voters could finally see which party was governing and which was obstructing.
Though the filibuster no longer applies to judicial nominations, it still prevents the Senate from functioning as intended. Major legislation is now passed only through reconciliation, executive fiat or brinksmanship. The 60-vote threshold has become a convenient excuse for inaction. Both parties claim to defend “tradition.” But traditions are worth keeping only if they serve the country’s interests. The filibuster no longer does.
Some Republicans hesitate to end the filibuster out of fear that Democrats will one day use that same power against them. But Democrats will use that power against them whether Republicans end the filibuster or not. GOP senators who defend the filibuster are ignoring basic game theory. As the classic prisoner’s dilemma shows us, in a repeated game, the player who always cooperates while the opponent who always betrays is doomed to lose.
Democrats have already shown they are willing to change the rules when it benefits them. They have openly called for eliminating the legislative filibuster when it stands in their way. Former president Barack Obama described it as a “Jim Crow relic.” To believe they would hesitate to remove it when next in power is wishful thinking. Why should Republicans unilaterally disarm when Democrats will never do so themselves?
In any strategic contest, deterrence works only when both sides believe in the other side’s willingness to act. By making clear that Republicans are prepared to end the filibuster — and to govern without it — we strengthen our negotiating hand. Paradoxically, the credible threat of eliminating the filibuster could preserve it longer than endless appeasement ever could.
January will test whether Republicans have the courage to follow through. If Democrats refuse to negotiate in good faith and close the government on Jan. 30, then Republicans must instantly abolish the filibuster. We cannot allow a procedural fossil to hold the country hostage. Ending the filibuster would break the legislative stalemate, make government more responsive to the needs of voters and restore the Senate to its proper function.
The post It’s time to end the filibuster appeared first on Washington Post.
