Sen. Ron Johnson, R-Wis., said Republicans should move toward ending the Senate filibuster on “Sunday Morning Futures” as lawmakers battle over Department of Homeland Security (DHS) funding, arguing the chamber’s 60-vote threshold to end a filibuster is preventing action on border and homeland security priorities.
Johnson called Democrats “obnoxious” and “obstructionist,” blaming them for the current government shutdown as the congressional stalemate over funding DHS continues. Democrats are refusing to allocate money to Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), which falls under DHS, unless their proposed reforms to the agency are accepted.
The Wisconsin Republican said Democrats would continue to obstruct budgetary votes under the current administration and predicted that, when they reclaimed the majority, they would get rid of the filibuster anyway.
“The split in the Senate, in terms of a filibuster, is [between] those of us who believe that Democrats will [get rid of] it next time they have the power, and those who are hoping beyond hope that they won’t.”
In practice, most major legislation in the Senate can be delayed or blocked by a filibuster unless 60 senators vote to end debate. As long as this is the case, Johnson argued, the deadlock will persist.
REPUBLICANS CAN FUND ICE FOR AN ENTIRE DECADE WITHOUT A SINGLE DEM VOTE: SEN CRUZ
He recommended moving toward a reconciliation process, a special budget procedure Congress can use to get around the filibuster and pass certain changes more quickly than ordinary legislation.
“Let’s get as much DHS funding as possible, move to reconciliation, pass a reconciliation bill focused on DHS funding through fiscal year 2029, and then be ready for another reconciliation to fund the rest of government, starting in October, when Democrats obstruct the regular order appropriation process,” he said.
SEN KENNEDY SAYS HE WOULD ACCEPT DEMOCRATS’ OFFER TO ‘OPEN UP EVERYTHING’ BUT ICE
Johnson admitted that he didn’t yet have a sufficient number of Republicans on his side to pass a vote dispensing with the filibuster, but argued that the U.S. Senate was “broken” due to overly complex rules impeding progress.
“My colleagues [say] ‘We don’t want to be responsible for breaking the Senate.’ How could it be much more broken?” he asked.
“When we’re at war with Iran… They might possibly have sleeper cells here in this country. We can’t even fund the very agency designed to keep our homeland safe. I don’t see how it could get much worse. So I’m for ending the 60-vote threshold and ending the filibuster.”
