The fate of the Senate filibuster will decide the future of the Biden presidency. Today, we dive deep into the filibuster’s origins and myths — and we talk to people who say that killing this arcane procedural roadblock is the only way to save the Senate.

Read more:

President Biden and Senate Democrats are faced with the question of whether to reform the rules of the filibuster — or even to terminate it altogether. In the view of many Democrats, it’s the only thing holding Biden back from executing ambitious plans on climate change, voting rights, immigration and the minimum wage.

“The disconnect between having a majority — which the Democrats now do — and needing 60 votes, which the Democrats can't get,” says national politics correspondent Philip Bump, “that disconnect really is shaping up to be one of the defining power struggles of the Senate.”

Today, Post Reports looks at the history of the filibuster — and why the myths about its origin obscure a more dismal story about its use to preserve slavery and prevent civil rights for Black Americans.

“They basically created a de facto supermajority standard for the passage of civil rights bills — and only civil rights bills,” says Adam Jentleson, author of a new book called “Kill Switch: The Rise of the Modern Senate and the Crippling of American Democracy.” His research explores the question of whether the Founding Fathers ever intended for a powerful tool like the filibuster. “The evidentiary record is very clear on this,” he says. “They were anti-obstruction.”

The repeated failure of the Senate to defeat filibusters that blocked civil rights was an “institution-wide failure,” according to U.S. Senate historian Daniel Holt, who explains the repeated attempts to bring the filibuster under control. “There was a reluctance to use the mechanisms at hand to force adoption of these bills — much to the detriment of the African Americans in the country.”

Rashad Robinson, the president of Color of Change, recently penned an opinion piece for USA Today about the need to end the filibuster. The legacy of the obstruction of the 1964 Civil Rights Act, he argues, is a dark stain on the Senate and its traditions. “People were literally being lynched, beaten and killed in order for that legislation to happen,” he says. “Blood was spilled in the streets in order to get to 60-plus votes.”

If you value the journalism you hear in this podcast, please subscribe to The Washington Post. We have a deal for our listeners — one year of unlimited access to everything the Post publishes for just $29. To sign up, go to postreports.com/offer.

The case against the filibuster 50:52 Share

Post Reports

Shownotes Transcript

The case against the filibuster