A filibuster in US politics is a tactic used in the Senate to delay or block legislative action by extending debate, thereby preventing a vote on a bill or nomination. It often involves a Senator—or a group—speaking at length or otherwise stalling to force concessions or to prevent the majority from advancing legislation. Key points
- Purpose: To impede or derail legislation or confirmations by preventing a timely vote.
- Mechanism: In practice, a filibuster is often countered by invoking cloture, a procedure that ends debate and requires a supermajority to proceed. Since the 1970s, cloture typically requires 60 votes in the Senate to succeed, though rules can evolve for certain actions.
- History and context: The filibuster is a long-standing feature of the Senate’s rules allowing minority voices to influence debate and outcomes, though its use and reform have been subjects of ongoing political debate.
- Modern relevance: Debates about ending or reforming the filibuster surface particularly during high-stakes legislative fights or during government shutdowns, with public arguments about majority-rule versus minority protections.
Notes for further reading
- For an official overview, the Senate site describes filibusters and cloture and their historical role.
- Contemporary analyses and explanations from major outlets provide current examples and arguments on reform or abolition debates.
If you’d like, I can tailor this explanation to a specific aspect (e.g., how cloture works in practice, notable historical filibusters, or how filibuster reform has been proposed in recent years).
