Senate Majority Leader John Thune sent a warning shot Monday over the talking filibuster, saying the procedural playcall is “way more complicated” than many supporters realize.
“This particular approach in terms of the process is much more complicated and risky than people are assuming at the moment,” Thune told reporters, cautioning that a talking filibuster without forcing through a formal rules change — for which there aren’t the votes — could take up months of Senate floor time.
Thune’s comments came after President Donald Trump urged the Senate to quickly take up and pass GOP-led voting legislation, known as the SAVE America Act — even if it means invoking a talking filibuster, which would force Democrats to physically hold the floor in order to block consideration of the bill.
Trump also pitched expanding the bill’s scope beyond voting to include red meat issues like banning men from participating in women’s sports and prohibiting gender-affirming surgery for children. Thune said Monday it would “make sense” for the House to send an updated bill to reflect Trump’s latest priorities.
Thune is the target of a fierce online pressure campaign to skirt the Senate’s 60-vote legislative filibuster — coming both from House Republicans and what the majority leader characterized Monday as a “paid influencer ecosystem.”
Part of the pitch from Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah) and his allies has been that Republicans could force Democrats into a talking filibuster without having to officially change the Senate rules or precedents. Thune reiterated Monday that formally nuking the legislative filibuster is “not going to happen.”
“The one thing I’ve said all along and I’ve told him and others — that I can’t guarantee an outcome,” Thune said, referring to Trump. “I can’t guarantee a result if the result is only achieved by nuking the legislative filibuster. We don’t have the votes to do that, and so that’s just not a realistic option, and I’ve made that clear to anybody who’s asked.”
But a significant number of GOP senators are also skeptical of a talking filibuster even without changing the Senate’s rules. Some believe the gambit would permanently weaken the 60-vote legislative filibuster. Others think the procedural option being floated by Lee and others is unworkable because it would let Democrats bog down the floor and potentially hijack the bill for any proposal for which they could get at least 50 votes.
“The process and how you ultimately try and get a result is still unclear to me based on all the research we’ve done,” Thune said Monday about invoking a talking filibuster, adding that conversations are still ongoing within the conference about the process.