Men like @JohnCornyn have nothing else in their lives besides the power of being called “Senator”. Sure they may have families and things, but they’d shove all of them in the sea to stay in power. So if you take that away from them, they burn it all down.
The infuriating thing is that doesn't matter. They do not have to "nuke the filibuster," and @LeaderJohnThune knows it. He's dissembling. He's choosing his words carefully and skirting around the fact that the Senate can use the talking filibuster. Moreover, he's lying if he says @SenateGOP must vote in favor of that procedure. He can bring the legislation to the floor and impose the procedure. He just won't.
And he relies on bozos like @seanhannity and others at @FoxNews to stop before asking that follow up question. They politely oblige.
John Thune Says at Least 15 Republican Senators Are a Hard ‘NAY’ on Nuking the Filibuster to Pass the SAVE America Act.
They met with 20 GOP Senators. 15 said NO.
We deserve to know the 15 are and why they are betraying their voters.
Name them all.
@BasedMikeLee , "mistake" and "mistaken" are not adequate substitutes for "lie" and "lying," which is actually what @LeaderJohnThune is doing and knows he is doing. Every word he says is more deception to pretend he cannot do his job when the truth is that he will not. He disgusts me. And the @SenateGOP members who are willing to remain silent and hide behind his deception are equally disgusting. What absolute lying cowards they are. They throw away the goodwill of their base by refusing to fight for legislation even Democrats support. One cannot be more cowardly than that.
My colleague from South Dakota suggests here that the talking filibuster hasn’t been used in a century, and that it was not used to pass the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
He’s mistaken.
As I’ve explained to the entire Senate GOP on multiple occasions, the talking filibuster *was* used effectively to break the weeks-long filibuster mounted against the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
Leader Thune and others point out that the Senate ultimately invoked cloture on the Civil Rights Act, and on that basis wrongly conclude that the talking filibuster was *not* the tool used to achieve that victory.
This argument ignores the fact that this is *how* the Senate closed a staggering 30-vote cloture deficit in 1964. After many weeks of fighting a losing battle, filibustering senators predictably started to lose their resolve to hold up the bill indefinitely, especially when they realized how hard they’d have to work to keep the effort alive.
So they started proposing and supporting amendments to the bill to make it more palatable and help them save face.
I still maintain that this is a viable approach that could work well—even better—in the context of the SAVE America Act, especially considering that the bill is less complicated and less controversial with voters than was the Civil Rights Act, and currently has a cloture deficit of only 10 votes—tiny compared to the 30-vote deficit faced by the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
My colleague also mistakenly suggests that Senate Republicans would have to vote to enforce the talking filibuster. That simply isn’t true; no vote is required for this step. All we need is a majority leader willing to announce that we’re getting on the bill and that we will continue to debate it until it passes—all with the understanding that if filibustering senators fail to show up to debate it, we can “call the question” and pass it with a simple majority.
That understanding, in turn, is what motivates the filibustering senators to show up and speak, but it’s also what naturally causes them to tire of the exercise after a few weeks, at which point they start looking for a face-saving off-ramp.
Finally, Leader Thune suggests that the talking filibuster would be thwarted by being “reset” every time Democrats offered an amendment. There’s a valid point in there, but it’s not a good reason not to invoke the talking filibuster. It appears he’s referring indirectly to paragraph 1(a) of Senate Rule 19 (the two-speech rule). While offering a new amendment can create a new question under longstanding practice, the September 25, 1986 precedent narrowed how rigidly the two-speech rule is applied by clarifying that many procedural actions do not count as speeches at all.
Particularly in light of that 1986 clarification, it’s been a long time since I’ve suggested we consider rigid enforcement of Rule 19’s two-speech limit as part of a talking filibuster strategy for the SAVE America Act. We don’t need it!
Nor was that rule aggressively enforced during the Senate’s consideration of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Majority Leader Mike Mansfield correctly focused on requiring actual debate from filibustering senators rather than looking for technical ways to shut the debate down.
To give credit where it’s due, I appreciate what Leader Thune said in this interview about the possibility of passing some iteration of SAVE America using budget reconciliation—a procedure in which there is no 60-vote cloture hurdle. I’ve been skeptical of this approach in the past, but I’m starting to believe the SAVE America Act has more budgetary features than I initially considered possible.
That said, reconciliation is fraught with all kinds of problems, challenges, risks, and uncertainties. Also, failure can be far too easy to blame on the parliamentarian.
I’m open to considering the reconciliation path, but we should make this decision with our eyes open. To do that, we need to separate fact from fiction when it comes to the talking filibuster.
We only need two things to restore confidence in our elections: Prove you are who you say you are, and have an Election Day—not an election month.
That’s what the SAVE America Act does. Let’s put it on the floor and pass it.
Today, the Senate begins the confirmation process for Jay Clayton to be Director of National Intelligence. We will also keep working on a Continuing Resolution to keep the government open. Tomorrow, we will honor Lindsey Graham in Washington. Wednesday, the Homeland Security Committee will hear from Dr. Anthony Fauci. And I will keep fighting to pass the SAVE America Act. Election security is something we need in all 50 states, not just 36. That’s What’s Moving on Monday.
Sen. Roger Marshall (R-KS) told a podcaster that he's upset at conservative media. He says their news coverage is making his parents mad.
“They sit home and they watch Fox News and Newsmax, and guess what? They’re mad at me, they’re mad at [Majority Leader] John Thune, they’re mad at Mitch McConnell — there’s this purity test,” Marshall said. “I feel this anger more than ever before,” concluded the MAGA senator."
Or maybe his parents are angry because their son is obstructing the president's agenda?
Perhaps Sen. Marshall could enlighten us as to the reason why the president has not been allowed to make a single recess appointment? Why is that, Sen. Marshall?
Why haven't you guys nuked the filibuster? Why haven't you passed the Save America Act?
Maybe that's why your parents are so mad. And I don't blame them one bit.
We only have 5 senators who agree to no recess. Unbelievable.
We only need 5 senators to call for a vote to remove Thune as Senate Majority leader.
Come on guys. I did not vote for no representation.
The Senate has done NOTHING to deserve a five-week break. We haven’t funded the military, we are about to let Democrats shut down the government, and our elections STILL aren’t secure. The House has passed hundreds of bills. Other than the One Big Beautiful Bill, all the Senate has done is pass bills rebuking Trump and giving Democrats handouts. We have lost sight of the fact that our job is to deliver RESULTS for the American people.
There is no issue I hear more about when I’m back home in Alabama than securing our elections. Under Communists Joe Biden and Barack Obama, more than 15 MILLION third-world illegals invaded our country. These illegals are costing the American taxpayers billions of dollars and are planning to vote in our midterm elections in just 99 days.
Because of this, the ‘traditions of the Senate’ should no longer apply. The American people didn’t vote for a Republican party obsessed with preserving their own power through the manufactured filibuster. They voted for a Republican party that campaigned on fighting back against the TENS OF MILLIONS of third-world illegals who came here under Joe Biden and are looking to destroy this country.
If we do not pass the SAVE America Act before November, Democrats will steal the 2026 and 2028 elections, and we will go back to Joe Biden’s immigration policy on steroids under the new Communist Democrat party. Now is the time to dig in, eliminate the manufactured filibuster, and start a new Senate tradition of actually getting things done for the Constitution and the American people.
I’ll be joining Senator Mike Lee in voting against any attempts to adjourn for recess. Americans didn’t send us to D.C. to take a vacation. They sent us here to preserve the greatest country on Earth.
This is what you said 12 days ago Senator Cruz @tedcruz@SenTedCruz .
Where are you Ted? Texans want this passed! Why aren’t you coming out and supporting Senators Mike Lee, Rick Scott, Jim Banks and Ashley Moody in cancelling the Senate Recess until the Save America Act is passed? Your silence is deafening!
And, just a few years ago you were calling for Mitch McConnell to step aside as the Leader of the GOP Senate. Why aren’t you working to remove Senator John Thune as the Senate Majority Leader @LeaderJohnThune ?
Time to get to work Ted. Texans and America are watching and waiting for you to step up!