Republicans in the Senate have been holding the line against using the “nuclear option” to break the ongoing government shutdown, even though they’re just five votes shy of the 60 needed to overcome Chuck Schumer’s filibuster. The idea of changing Senate rules to allow a simple majority for passing bills, much like they did earlier this year to speed up confirmations for President Donald Trump’s nominees, has been floated, but this time, Republican leadership isn’t biting. Yet.
But according to Sen. Roger Marshall (R-Kan.), changing the rules is not an option. “Never, never, ever, never, none. I’ve never heard that since the Democrats tried to do it, and I think we would all fight it pretty hard.”
The argument is straightforward. Republicans don’t want to hand future Democrat majorities the power to pass their most extreme legislative dreams without obstruction. Of course, history shows that when rules get in the way of what the Democrats want, they have no qualms about changing them.
Let’s not forget that Democrats weaponized the filibuster when George W. Bush was president, blocking his judicial nominees. But the moment Republicans used the same tactic during Obama’s presidency, suddenly the filibuster was “anti-democratic” and a “racist relic” of the Jim Crow era. So, Harry Reid nuked the filibuster in 2013, stripping the filibuster away for lower-court nominations, a move that blew up in their faces when Trump used it to confirm a record number of conservative judges during his first term.
Did Democrats learn? Not even close. In 2021, they nearly nuked the legislative filibuster in order to ram through sweeping election takeover bills that would have shredded state election laws, forced universal mail-in voting, diluted safeguards, and even paved the way to abolish the Electoral College. Former Sens. Joe Manchin and Kyrsten Sinema stopped it, but only barely.
Related: Chuck Schumer Destroyed the Democratic Party’s Messaging on the Shutdown
The truth is simple: the next time Democrats control the Senate, they will nuke the filibuster if it stands in their way. Knowing that, Republicans face a tough question: Why make it easier for them when that day comes? Sen. Eric Schmitt of Montana doesn’t think they should, calling Democrats’ shutdown tactics unsustainable and predicting public pressure will eventually force them to fold. Idaho’s Cynthia Lummis still praises bipartisanship and defends the filibuster as essential, but even she admits that tensions on the Hill are boiling over, with lawmakers shouting in the corridors and neither side budging.
Democrats have spent decades exploiting the filibuster when it suits them, then threatening to scrap it when it doesn’t. That hypocrisy alone should make any Republican rethink why they keep playing by rules the other side rewrites at will. Maybe the answer isn’t to end the filibuster but to return it to what it was meant to be: a talking filibuster. If Schumer wants to stall a funding bill, let him talk until his voice gives out. Let his caucus take turns through the night to keep it alive. And when they stop talking, the chamber votes.
That kind of reform would make obstruction painful again, something senators actually have to work at, rather than a procedural gimmick. It would put the filibuster back in its rightful place as a tool of the minority, not a weapon of perpetual gridlock. Republicans may have good reason to avoid the nuclear option this time, but sooner or later, they’ll have to decide whether they’re preserving the filibuster for principle or keeping it as a loaded gun for Democrats to grab when the tables turn.
