The political landscape in Washington is ever-changing, and it seems that the Democrats are experiencing a classic case of “filibuster whiplash.” Remember when Vice President Kamala Harris and her party were rallying to abolish the filibuster? They argued passionately that it was a hindrance to their agenda. Fast forward to today, and what do we see? A sudden affection for the filibuster—it’s almost like a bad romantic comedy where the characters can’t seem to decide if they’re in love or out.
Democrats, who once saw the filibuster as a relic of a bygone era, are now cozying up to it tighter than a winter blanket. The reason behind this sudden change of heart is clear: Republicans have regained some ground in Congress, and their political fortunes are shifting. Enter Kristen Sinema, the independent senator from Arizona, who has pointed out this curious transformation. It’s a classic example of political convenience—rules only being convenient when they serve your interests.
In response to this political flip-flop, Jeremy Boring, a prominent figure in conservative circles, has put forth an interesting proposal. He urges incoming Senate Majority Leader John Thune to push for a constitutional amendment that enshrines the filibuster in the Constitution. The idea is straightforward; if the Democrats won’t solidify this rule within the next 18 months, then Republicans should “nuke” it altogether. This stance emphasizes an important principle: either the rules apply to everyone, or they apply to no one at all.
By proposing to make the filibuster a part of the Constitution, Republicans are challenging their Democratic counterparts to either commit to this procedural tool or face its extinction. It’s a call for consistency in the application of Senate rules—a notion that seems to vanish whenever power shifts from one party to another. The very foundation of a stable political system rests on the idea that rules should not change with the tides of electoral success. Consistency fosters trust, a commodity that seems in short supply in today’s political arena.
In a humorous twist, one might wonder if this turnaround is evidence that Democrats are just as skilled at playing political musical chairs as they are at changing their tune on the filibuster. But this side show poses a serious question for the future of American governance. As the country grapples with polarized politics, the need for a stable rule set is more critical than ever. The GOP’s proposed amendment serves as a reminder: the rules of the game must be honored, and if they’re not, then maybe it’s time to rethink the game altogether.
