Will Congress change its rules for abortion protections and voting rights? What to know

WASHINGTON – There's a reason most politicians haven't been able to enact their big, sweeping campaign promises in recent years: A longtime Senate oddity known as the filibuster.

Depending on who you ask, it is considered a hindrance or a protector for democracy.

Vice President Kamala Harris is squarely in the former camp. The 2024 Democratic presidential nominee told Wisconsin Public Radio earlier this week that if she wins the White House she would support eliminating the filibuster in order to pass federal abortion rights akin to those protected under Roe v. Wade, which are supported by a majority of Americans.

Chuck Schumer feels the same way. The current Senate leader also recently signaled his interest in changing the rules next year to pass voting rights legislation, but only in the event Harris is elected president and Democrats maintain their majority.

Both Republicans and Democrats have tried and failed before to do away with the tactic. And despite Harris' promise, it is unclear Democrats would have the votes to do so even if they can accomplish the longshot feat of maintaining control of the chamber.

In practice, the filibuster sets a 60-vote threshold for legislation to pass the Senate – a supermajority that has made it difficult, and some say nearly impossible, for a party to pass key parts of its agenda, even if it controls both chambers of Congress and the White House.

That has real consequences. Decades of bills protecting civil rights, and more recently, voting rights reforms and an assault weapons ban, for example, have been stymied by failure to reach 60 votes in the 100-person Senate, despite majority support. Democrats used the tactic when Trump and congressional Republicans held power across the U.S. government in 2017 and 2018, including blocking Pentagon funding amid a border wall dispute.

Opponents of the filibuster argue it ignores the desires of a majority of Americans and emboldens states with small populations to decide policy for the rest of the country.

"We can't continue to let an extremist Republican minority block the actions that Americans want to see us take," said Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., citing priorities like abortion rights, voting rights, labor protections, immigration reform and gun safety laws. "None of those will happen so long as Republican extremists – who are in the minority and represent minority views across this country – continue to call all the shots."

But the filibuster also has its fierce defenders, who argue the it forces much-needed compromise between the two parties.

"It's an extension of the Founding Fathers, it's everything we are," said Sen. Joe Manchin, I-W.V., who said he won't endorse Harris over her comments earlier this week. "It's hard for me to endorse anybody who accepts that you can get rid of the 60-vote threshold."

However, both sides have already made some changes to the tradition – a move so controversial it has been referred to as "the nuclear option" in the chamber. Democratic Senate leaders carved out an exception in 2013 for then-President Barack Obama's judicial nominees. Republicans responded when Trump held the White House by eliminating the filibuster for Supreme Court nominees in 2017, a move that has since helped create a conservative majority on the high court and the elimination of the abortion rights protected by Roe.

Trump pushed Senate Republicans to eliminate the filibuster dozens of times while he was president, but has not weighed in during this campaign on whether he would do the same if he wins a second non-consecutive term. Republicans say they will not make exceptions to the filibuster for their own priorities, such as changes to immigration or voting laws, if they retake control of the chamber. Democrats doubt their sincerity.

"The day Republicans vote to nuke the filibuster is the day I walk out the door," said Sen. Thom Tillis, R-N.C., who noted that the party repeatedly resisted Trump's calls to end the filibuster for legislation while he was president.

"I don't believe that will ever happen because we have people who have the courage of their convictions and we've already demonstrated to a very powerful personality that when it comes to nuking this institution we're wiling to stand against a president of our own party," Tillis added.

Is the filibuster at risk next year?

Schumer has made it clear he's ready to carve out exceptions to the filibuster for key Democratic priorities. He tried to do so for voting rights in 2022 with the support of President Joe Biden, but two Democrat-turned-independent Sens. Joe Manchin of West Virginia and Kyrsten Sinema of Arizona blocked the effort.

Both of those senators are retiring from the chamber at the end of the year, and other reluctant senators have since changed their minds. Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., previously opposed eliminating the filibuster and flipped to support Schumer's carveout for voting rights. Sanders said earlier this month he's ready to do the same for abortion.

Sen. Jon Tester, D-Mont., arguably the most vulnerable senator in 2024, has said he would not eliminate the filibuster and instead would support a so-called "talking filibuster," as he did for the voting rights anti-filibuster push in 2022.

Unlike the House's ability to pass legislation with a simple majority, Senate rules require 60 votes to end debate on a bill. If senators refuse to let debate end by continuing to talk, that's a filibuster.

In recent years, just the knowledge that bills could be obstructed indefinitely have stopped lawmakers from even needing to take the floor to speak indefinitely. Tester's proposal would be to make senators actually follow through on that threat, rather than cowing to the idea of it.

Democrats are hopeful that they can defend their existing seats in November and even gain ground in GOP-held states like Florida, Texas or Nebraska, though political observers say the odds are against them. If Tester wins reelection, he would likely be the most conservative Democrat remaining in the upper chamber in 2025 – giving him major sway over what happens should Harris be in the White House and a vote gets called to kill the filibuster.

“I don’t want to make this thing like the House. We shouldn’t allow one person to stop this,” Tester told Semafor. “Make them talk. If they quit talking, vote.”

This article originally appeared on USA TODAY: Will Congress eliminate the filibuster? What to know