Very few are willing to buck their political party, stick to convictions, and do what’s right.
I have disagreed with McConnell many times. But he is consistent.
McConnell was against killing the filibuster when Democrats wanted to do it, and he is against doing so now.
And Tillis just hit one out of the park.
Former Senator Ben Sasse on the Filibuster
Please consider America Needs the Filibuster by Ben Sasse U.S. senator from Nebraska, 2015-23.
Americans are addicted to apocalypse porn. Politicians on both sides warn that the world will end unless American life is immediately reordered around a particular set of policy proposals. The questions change, but the answer is always the same: To prevent American carnage or to defend democracy from darkness, power must be consolidated—right now.
The upper house is built for the long view, with six-year terms that encourage a deliberative trustee model of representation. Senators owe their states both judgment and conscience. The House provides faster-loop warnings about public frustrations. Two-year terms and smaller districts combine to encourage a more urgent, passionate delegate model of representation.
That’s American Constitutionalism 101. While the Senate’s filibuster rule isn’t in the text of the most glorious political document ever written, it plays a critical role in limiting and dividing power.
When partisans talk about killing or “reforming” the filibuster, they’re saying they want to turn the Senate into another House of Representatives. That would be a tragic mistake. The filibuster prevents the dramatic pendulum swings that are the natural result of simple-majority lawmaking. Every election and every vote becomes an existential crisis in a system that no longer plods through checks and balances but instead rushes to European-style referenda.
It’s a partisan’s dream: Court packing, new states, federal takeover of state elections, national adoption of Utah’s gun laws or New York’s abortion laws. Sweeping changes to nearly every aspect of national and local life.
Voters might love or hate this or that policy outcome. Senators can love or hate the supermajority requirement—there are plenty of politicians who have shamelessly taken both sides of the filibuster debate depending on whether their party possesses or anticipates a Senate majority. But all of us should recognize the danger that a faster, less-constrained government will chip away at the American creed.
The partisans who decry the filibuster always say, “The stakes are too high and we’ve got to do it for X.” Then there’s this: “The other guys are going to do it themselves, so let’s do it first.” The reality is that once the dam breaks, the stakes will climb endlessly higher. For every X on the right, there’s a Y on the left. Without the filibuster, we’ll have a never-ending cascade of doom-peddlers telling Americans our best days are behind us unless we secure 51 immediate votes for their golden legislative ticket.
There remains a chance for national recovery. It will evaporate if the right succumbs fully to the temptation of the one-way ratchet of consolidated power.
America’s public square needs a recovery. That depends on regular folks showing up, affirming a “one cheer for politics” ethos, rolling their eyes at jeremiads, laughing at apocalypse pornographers, and gratefully celebrating 250 years and counting. All of these become less likely if we foolishly eliminate the filibuster.
Republicans Against the Save Act
- Sens. Susan Collins (R-Maine)
- Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.)
- Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska)
- Thom Tillis (R-N.C.)
Thom Tillis’ Blistering Critique Of Trump’s SAVE Act Timeline
Senator Thom Tillis delivers a sharp critique of the proposed SAVE Act timeline, questioning whether the legislation can realistically be implemented before the 2026 midterm elections. During the hearing, Tillis raises concerns about the challenges of meeting deadlines, election administration, and the practical impact of the plan.
Watch the full exchange as Sen. Tillis challenges officials over the feasibility of the SAVE Act, voter verification requirements, election security, and the road ahead for the 2026 elections. This heated discussion highlights the growing debate over election laws and implementation.
Tillis Accuses Lee of Not Being Honest with the American People
Please play the video. Tillis blasts Mike Lee’s hypocrisy and timeline.
Tillis: “Don’t fool the American people thinking you can implement something of this complexity in sixty days. As a matter of fact, the senior Senator from Utah’s Legislature has recently changed their policy of mass mailing ballots to everybody. They decided it took three years to implement that. I would ask the senior Senator from Utah, why don’t you speed that up? … Or let’s start being honest to the American people. … We should figure out a way to get voter ID in every state. That’s good government.”
Senator Fetterman on the SAVE Act
Senator John Fetterman (D-PA) does not support the SAVE Act in its current form.
While he supports voter identification, he finds the House-passed bill “needlessly complicated” and objects to the inclusion of restrictions on mail-in voting, calling it a “nonstarter”
Please consider Fetterman Statement on Voting Against Debate on the SAVE America Act
- “83% of Americans agree on voter ID.
- “71% of Democrats agree on voter ID.
- “Keep it basic: PHOTO ID to vote.
- “Stop turning this into a Christmas list and attacking vote-by-mail.
- “If the GOP wants real reform over a show vote––put out a clean, standalone bill and I’m AYE.”
That statement was in March. I agree.
“If the GOP wants real reform over a show vote––put out a clean, standalone bill and I’m AYE.”
That is also the position of Tillis.
Sue Collins Changed Her Vote
In February, Sue Collins was a “yes” on the act.
Please note Sen. Susan Collins says SAVE Act would ensure confidence in election results
But Trump demanded the bill be loaded with nonsense, first losing Fetterman, then Collins.
In February, she was the 50th vote. Reflect on that.
I wrote about this back on March 11. Please recall SAVE Act Silliness: Trump’s “Go for the Gold” Killed It
I Support Voter ID
Let me start by saying I support voter ID. And I support the idea that only citizens should vote.
If that’s all the SAVE ACT did, I would support it. Unfortunately the SAVE Act is about illegal voter suppression of females and minorities.
And the Constitution leaves voting procedures up to states.
Yet suddenly, states rights MAGA supporters now want anything that Trump wants, including war.
But Trump asked the gathered lawmakers to add in provisions curbing mail voting and targeting transgender rights — even it means abandoning the remainder of their legislative agenda before the November elections.
“Let’s go for the gold,” he said. “It’s actually a matter in a serious way of national survival. We can’t have these elections going on like this anymore.”
“They have to get it done,” he said of the Senate. “If it takes you six months — I’m for not approving anything. … I don’t think we should approve anything until this is approved.”
I am pleased to present the odds on “going for the gold” complete with fresh taunts today, to me.
Save Act Is Unconstitutional
On March 4, 2026, I gave Three Reasons the Save Act Is Unconstitutional
The SAVE Act won’t pass, and that’s a good thing.
Senator Lisa Murkowski’s Vote Against the SAVE Act
On July 19, 2026, I commented Senator Lisa Murkowski’s Rock Solid Reason to Vote Against the SAVE Act
You have to be purposefully ignorant or wish to steal the election to disagree with Murkowski.
Where Things Stand
In the off-chance you have not figured this out, blame Trump, Mike Lee, and the entire MAGA charade for no movement on voter ID.
With common sense legislation, Tillis, Fetterman, Collins, and Murkowski would have voted for it.
But this was never about voter ID. It was always about illegal voter suppression and unconstitutional directions to states on how to run elections.
Time Has Run Out
Fortunately, time has run out on Trump’s proposed unconstitutional madness. Thank you Senators Mitch McConnel and Thom Tillis.
Thank them and another handful for the filibuster as well.
Note that 50 votes would not guarantee passage even with Vice President Vance’s tie-breaking vote because this is not a budget reconciliation item.
So it’s not just a matter of finding 50 votes. It’s a matter of finding 50 votes willing to kill the filibuster.
Ultimately, there are not 50 votes to kill the filibuster which is the final hurdle. There are at least 7 Republican Senators against killing the filibuster.
Thus, even if Murkowski switched her vote, the SAVE Act would still be shot down by the Senate rules.
The bill was doomed from the start as written.
Perhaps we are just too big to hold representatives accountable. 750k constituents to 1 is entirely too great. The cap on congressmen should never have been that low because the chamber was too small. Increasing representatives would reduce gerrymandering and maybe increase the potential for independent candidates. Let’s give each state 3 senators while we’re at it. That means every 2 years you vote for a senator. Hence you can update the calculus depending on how you see things are going. And you might spilt your stare 2-1, You also get more people to split the load of work that needs to be done. And make a rule that you cannot have more senators than representatives. I know people have talked about this for a long time.
Addendum: 3rd senator cannot be registered with the uniparty.
Too many boot lickers in dc. Laws, the US Constitution, the Bill of Rights and etc., have all been abandoned during the deranged taco’s reign of terror. Spines and doing the right thing are but absent among the dc stooges.
The filibuster is antiquated and anti democratic. Aaron Burr accidentally created it by suggesting that the previous question rule that the 1796 Senate had implemented be removed because heretical it had not been used. Its first attempt was to prevent a banking bill. In the 1950s and 60s it was used to hold up civil and voting rights.
The Constitution is filled with measures to prevent a so-called rush to judgment after an election or event and or circumstance that may create a bill or law short circuiting the people’s liberties in the guise of security or some other happenstance that was isolated, rare and the response was reactionary.
Well ive noticed over the years is the republican party always seems to have some sort of boogie man
Mm not being there to vote is about the best thing for the repubs since he found conscience. Due to not running for reelection. And they are keeping him alive enough to prevent special election.
Funny how when mtg mm and all those others shuck the republican stand as one play book i could actually vote for them. .
Getting interesting.
“I’m not living in Communist America… I’ve read the quotes from the DSA platform, from their own mouths. Don’t tell me I’m not seeing what I am seeing,” Bill Maher told ABC News’ Jonathan Karl in an exclusive interview that aired on Sunday.
There are many groups of different beliefs in-the us. Dsa and far left is a lot smaller and dangerous than the far rt. Who happen to be gaining control of the gov.
In 2015, the Danish Prime Minister Lars Rasmussen observed, “I know that some people in the U.S. associate the Nordic model with some sort of socialism. Therefore, I would like to make one thing clear. Denmark is far from a socialist planned economy. Denmark is a market economy.” Likewise, Social Democratic Minister of Finance Kjell‐Olof Feldt stated “That whole thing with democratic socialism was absolutely impossible. It just didn’t work.”
https://jonathanturley.org/2026/07/19/the-dsa-and-the-myth-of-scandinavian-socialism/
You are nuts.
More apocalypse porn, as referenced in the article, which is specifically what these frictions are introduced into the system to avoid (or at least delay until their illusory intensity dissipates again).
The system is designed, rightly, to grind slowly, and stymie a lot of screeching hysterical factions. It is designed to smooth them. This was a wisdom most modern folks cannot grasp.
Bill is a dunce.
I really hope the country survives the midterms and whatever fascist shenanigans the Republicans try to pass – once that happens, the system can re-adapt and hopefully get back on a normal path where the rule of law matters
We have long passed the point of no return, of tit-for-tat attacks as factions gain and lose power, where each faction must use all available power on their enemies, lest their enemies use that power on them.
The end of the Roman Republic is most instructive.
It is perversely ironic that India, a country with a much larger population than the US, a more fragmented political system, myriad serious political parties, dozens of languages, poverty, illiteracy, caste divisions, etc. still manages to hold democratic elections, after which power changes hands and winner and losers generally agree on the outcomes.
Contrast with the US clownshow.
India Is Increasingly Ruled by a Single Party—Modi’shttps://archive.ph/20260512023203/https://www.wsj.com/world/india/india-is-increasingly-ruled-by-a-single-partymodis-c6f616e9#selection-537.0-537.52
On a national level, yes, but a lot of politics in India takes place at the state and local levels.
Moreover, that doesn’t take away from what I said.
What Trump wants is a Russian style election where a company Trump owns counts the votes of the voters he allows to vote.
You know the pattern: Grifting for profit. Raping with impunity. Killing without regard for man, woman or child. As long you are the enemy of the radical theocratic nation that has the goods on you.
Russian style?
Putin does not own a vote-counting company.
Putin does not grift publicly like Trump.
What do you even know about day-to-day life in Russia?
@webej – Alexei Navalny? What happened to him? At least Trump isn’t killing people like that.
What about the thug that ran Wagner? Yevgeny Prigozhin ring a bell?
Putin’s palace in Sochi? Novgorod? Gelendzhik? Those are all pretty public. Some even would say Putin is the richest man in the world, and that’s believable.
Don’t even come in here and try to compare Trump to Putin unfavorably.
I can’t stand Trump, but he’s not a murderous dictator like Putin.
Just get out of here with your tankie nonsense.
We hear similar tales with respect to any leader that the United States doesn’t like.
Ever hear the term Stochastic Terrorist? That’s Trump. He gets his minions to murder for him. January 6th alone had Americans die, because he said to his minions, come on down and fight, fight, fight. And they did. There is also death by neglect and misinformation. Taking food aid away, is killing people. There’s lying about alternate cures for diseases…it goes on and on. His ICE crew that he hired to walk around with masks have also killed people. Americans. And no we have not heard about him throwing people out of windows or poisoning them. He has his own ways. Not a regretful bone in his body.
I vote in another country. I have to register once in a lifetime and biometrics are collected from me. At the voting desk, I present my registration and have my fingerprint scanned, then I head to a voting booth opened for me to go in and punch the vote in. That’s a country with hundreds of millions of voters with elections of some level every couple of years.
We have a federalist system where the voting procedures are handled at the state level.
That’s a good thing, IMHO. It’s harder for a single party or entity to seize control.
Mish, and My friends here: I am going to take one line of his treatise and try my best to correct a concept:
“During the hearing, Tillis raises concerns about the challenges of meeting deadlines, election administration, and the practical impact of the plan.”
CORRECTED, if he were being COMPLETELY HONEST ABOUT IT (changes are Bold, Italicized and underlined:
——————SEE MY FIRST DRAFT BELOW————
“During the hearing, Tillis raised concerns about the fact that THE challenges of meeting deadlines, election administration, and the practical impacts of the plan – – the entire plans’ goals – – REPEAT: are the GOALS of TrumpPhuckistan – – so that the Elections will be forced to be canceled or disrupted entirely and then any results that are not FAVORABLE to TrumpCO will be challenged and reversed/.”
Here’s a comment worth debating relevant to this article. The idea that you can dismiss the filibuster with just 50 votes nullifies its existence. What’s the purpose if you can change the rule. If you set the bar at 60, you should need a vote of 60 to repeal it. A narrow majority overriding a super majority makes no sense.
No Congress can hold a prior Congress to prior senate rules or lower house rules nor bills.
Thank you. Every new session of Congress the representatives are free to write a new set of rules. But they don’t, because this horrible system of committees and filibusters and holds and baloney gives a few people great power over what gets done and makes most representatives powerless. And every session, the newbies and oldies alike decided to keep playing this thing they consider a game in the same manner. While the country burns down.
If the country is burning down, look at Trump, MAGA, warmongers as the primary cause, not Senate rules that stabilize things.
Sheesh.
Look in the mirror as well.
If Republicans were serious about voter ID for voting, they would be pushing to ensure that every American has a valid voter ID and set a target for it, AFTER which a voter ID requirement would kick in.
The fact that they are not pushing to supply every American with ID, at no cost, clearly shows that their desires lay somewhere else.
They seriously understand that the voters don’t want them, and are trying to rig things to subvert the will fo the voters.
Period.
Agree – although you would also have to have an independent review that there had been no bias in the takeup.
“Independent review” and “America” sadly do not go together these days…..hence gerrymandering.
An Online Digital ID Verification system is in fact being built out as I write this. It’s not fully in in place yet but will be within the next few years.
The republican machine has been kicking the voter id dog for years. Trump has just taken it to a new level.
why not just tattoo frumps face on all of our asses mark of the beast sort of thing.
We already have that one… its just between the cheeks.
That’s definitely not going to work for its intended purpose—but it would work perfectly for Trump.
The instant he hears about it, there’ll be an executive order declaring that only one approved supplier can apply the tattoo—and, by an astonishing coincidence, it’ll be one of his companies. Which is only natural, of course—it’s his face!
If you can cough up enough cash, congratulations—you get the Citizenship™ tattoo.
* YEMEN’S HOUTHIS DECLARE A MARITIME EMBARGO AGAINST THE CRIMINAL SAUDI ARABIA — STATEMENT
@reuters.com
#BabElMandeb
Bab el-Mandab strait will be closing soon. Soon the Suez Canal will be the only way any significant oil gets out of the Middle East.
In many ways having a convicted felon war mongered and grifting rapist does represent the 52% of Americans with an IQ of less than 100.
Stupid people are easily fooled…
Trump has a big advantage with the easily manipulated.
War Mongering that is… 😉
All one needs to do is attend an American sporting event or go to a public area to see the masses of obese, unkept slobs that now populate our nation.
I was standing on the steps of the Le Train Bleu restaurant in the Gare de Lyon train station in Paris recently, looking across the busy station and asked my traveling compatriots “what is missing from this scene compared to America”?
The answer? Fat people!
Nothing says America like a fat dude pumping gas into his pickup in his PJs at 2:00 in the afternoon.
The less you sit, the longer you will live
There is to types of stupid. Least the dumb dems vote for policies they benefit from.
meanwhile: New $500M Artillery Shell Plant Failed To Produce Any 155mm PartsA scathing new Pentagon Inspector General report found problems at the plant delayed the Army’s 100,000 round-per-month goal. https://www.twz.com/land/new-500m-artillery-shell-plant-failed-to-produce-any-155mm-parts
How is this related?
It’s not. You can tell because the first word is: “meanwhile:”.
Can’t kill hospital terror babies without ammo….get on it boys!!!
As for the taunts above, you are kind of a retard. 😄😄😄
just kidding!!!
(or am I 🤔)
Upset to see that Andy Burnham has dropped plans for digital ID in the UK. I think this would have formed the basis of stopping illegal immigration and streamlining other services. Any remaining libertarian arguments against this disappeared years ago as big tech knows all about everybody.
On voting, mandatory voting (as done in Australia) has so many benefits that I don’t undertand why it isn’t done elsewhere. It reduces partisanship, serves the less heard in society etc. In return for voting, people would get some benefit (so non-voting is not considered an offence that needs policing).
Mandatory voting wouldn’t do well in America with the forced to party system. People would just go vote and write in Mickey Mouse making it a burden to everyone.
The idea that you can only have two parties, you can only express two political views, at a time runs a little contrary to the concept of democracy. You can pick anything you want as long as it’s only from these two options
The choices are Coke or Pepsi. Both bad for you, just different names and labels. I Prefer water, but that isn’t a choice. The glass half empty or half full is a moot point now. The water in the glass is non potable and it needs to be emptied, washed clean and filled with fresh, clean, water.
Democrats: Promise change and fairness for all. Rainbows and Unicorns that poop skittles, free everything for everybody…. then they screw you.
Republicans: Let you know from the start that you are voting for tradition, the ways that made this country great! Well, that country doesn’t exist anymore, so you’re probably screwed anyway, no matter what… it’s tradition!
Voting = Suggestion box for slaves.
“The Choices Are Coke or Pepsi. Both Bad For You” – Quit Voting – You’re Complicit.!
It means a person shares responsibility or is a partner in the ‘Wrongdoing’ – Even if they did not directly commit the primary act themselves.!
We need more options. Coke and Pepsi are the most popular but everyone needs a taste of something different now and then.
Time for the Uncola. Drink freedom, vote for a third party!
In a poli sci class in college a long time ago, the prof told me that a two party system is the natural result of a “first past the gate” voting system, where whomever gets the most votes wins, regardless of whether the number of votes represents a majority. Libertarians are a great example. They represent maybe 10% of the voting population, so they can never get a seat in Congress. So it makes more sense to ally with, and represent, other interests willing to accept at least some of their ideology: Republicans in this case.
The worst part of a two party system is that whomever is elected may in fact represent a tiny portion of the population. So imagine a voting district that is 51% Republican, with 4 Republican candidates representing one of libertarians, right-wing Christians, militarists, or business interests. One person can win with 26% of the vote which represents just 13% of voters views. Hence the low regard in which Americans hold their legislatures.
That is exactly the point of mandatory voting. At the moment you get parties that play to their core base and have candidates who are there because they one a primary that is only voted on by the fringes. WIth mandatory voting, parties have to think about the whole population.
The only limitation to two parties is in your mind. You have more than two choices, you just have to break through your perception that a vote for a third party is ‘throwing away your vote’, it is not. Your vote only makes a difference (i.e., counts) in an election if it is the deciding vote that changes the result from one party to another. How many times will that happen in your lifetime?
Free your mind
And the rest will follow