Campaña

Arreglar el obstruccionismo

Durante demasiado tiempo, los senadores estadounidenses han abusado del obstruccionismo para bloquear la legislación popular y sofocar la voluntad de los votantes.

Each year, important and popular legislation dies on the Senate floor, because the filibuster allows a minority of senators—representing a disproportionately white segment of the country’s population—can stop any legislative action in its tracks.

The 60-vote filibuster rule is undemocratic, and it needs to go.

The filibuster as it is used today is not a talk-til-you-drop marathon session on the Senate floor. Instead, it is a mechanism that allows a handful of senators to shut down a bill behind closed doors.

That’s right: the filibuster does not inspire bipartisan action. It is a recipe for gridlock and gives the Senate minority total veto power over the entire legislative process, even though they lost the election.

That is why Common Cause is dedicated to fixing the broken 60-vote filibuster.

Where did the filibuster come from?

The filibuster has been abused repeatedly to diminish the political power of Black and brown voters and the lawmakers who represent them. In fact, the filibuster’s most notorious historical use was by Strom Thurmond in an attempt to block the Civil Rights Act of 1957. He and others tried to filibuster the Civil Rights Act of 1964 as well.

During President Obama’s term, a minority of senators used it to shut down the DREAM Act, transparency in campaign spending (the DISCLOSE Act), gun violence prevention legislation, and workers’ rights.

All of these bills would have passed an up-or-down vote, but instead, they died on the Senate floor. Why? Because the filibuster allows the Senate minority to overrule the majority and block whatever bills it chooses. A handful of senators—who themselves represent a smaller portion of the country’s population—have absolute veto power over our entire legislative process.

That is not democracy.

What is Common Cause doing?

Common Cause has a long history of efforts to fix the filibuster. In 2012, we even sued the U.S. Senate in Common Cause v. Biden challenging the constitutionality of the rule.

Common Cause v. Biden

Presentación legal

Common Cause v. Biden

Leer más

Fixing the filibuster is not a radical idea. The filibuster is not in the Constitution, which does explicitly outline when a supermajority vote is necessary to pass legislation.

Moreover, the Senate’s rules around debate and the filibuster have been amended many times before—including by Sen. Mitch McConnell, who made the change to ram through two Supreme Court nominees with a simple majority.

Many major political figures from across the aisle have even expressed support for the filibuster’s elimination. This includes former President Barack Obama, who called it a “Jim Crow relic” at the funeral of civil rights hero Rep. John Lewis.

It only takes a simple Senate majority to change the chamber’s rules again and end the filibuster. Help us bring about this urgently needed reform by taking action today.

Su apoyo financiero nos ayuda a generar un impacto al: Hacer que el poder rinda cuentas y fortalecer la democracia.

Donar

La libertad de votar o la libertad de obstruir

Entrada de blog

La libertad de votar o la libertad de obstruir

Los senadores republicanos utilizaron un vacío legal en las reglas del Senado —el obstruccionismo— para bloquear incluso la celebración de un debate sobre la Ley de Libertad de Voto. Es la tercera vez que impiden a sus colegas debatir la legislación sobre el derecho al voto este año. Los senadores ahora se enfrentan a una elección: proteger la libertad de voto y encontrar una manera de enviar este proyecto de ley al escritorio del presidente Biden, o dejar que muera debido a la obstrucción republicana y al abuso de las reglas internas del Senado.

Prensa

Omaha World Herald: Nebraska Legislature examines new rules to limit filibusters

Clip de noticias

Omaha World Herald: Nebraska Legislature examines new rules to limit filibusters

Gavin Geis, executive director for Common Cause Nebraska, said the current rules serve as a safeguard that ensures a balanced approach to redistricting, a process that has received heavy scrutiny across the country for over-politicization.

"The removal of party registration as a factor in selecting committee members may lead to a lack of diversity in thought and perspective, resulting in skewed representation that doesn't accurately (represent) the political landscape of our state," Geis said.

Insider: De 18 proyectos de ley a favor de la democracia en 2022, el obstruccionismo del Senado de EE. UU. torpedeó 17 de ellos: informe

Clip de noticias

Insider: De 18 proyectos de ley a favor de la democracia en 2022, el obstruccionismo del Senado de EE. UU. torpedeó 17 de ellos: informe

Common Cause también clasificó a los miembros individuales del Congreso según sus esfuerzos a favor de la democracia, y 101 miembros, todos demócratas, obtuvieron una puntuación perfecta. Eso representa un aumento de más del 70% con respecto a la cantidad de miembros del Congreso que obtuvieron puntuaciones perfectas (58) en el Cuadro de Indicadores de la Democracia de 2020.

La presidenta de Common Cause, Karen Hobert Flynn, citó la obstrucción legislativa como el obstáculo a la reforma prodemocrática. 

"Al final, con altos niveles de apoyo en el Congreso y una abrumadora manifestación de apoyo público, el Congreso salió airoso...

Cerca

Cerca

¡Hola! Parece que te unes a nosotros desde {estado}.

¿Quieres ver lo que está pasando en tu estado?

Ir a causa común {estado}