Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

Voting rights advocates echo Biden’s call for filibuster reform

Joe Biden's voting rights speech

President Biden speaks about voting rights in Atlanta on Tuesday.

Megan Varner/Getty Images

President Biden gave an emotional speech in Atlanta on Tuesday, calling on Republicans to support election reform legislation and encouraging a change to long-standing Senate rules in order to get the work done.

But despite Biden’s use of the bully pulpit and new polling that shows a majority of Americans favor reforms, the proposed bills appear stalled unless the Senate changes or abolishes the filibuster. Advocates for the Freedom to Vote Act and the John Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act recognize the situation and renewed calls for the Senate to change how it conducts business.


While all 50 Democrats in the Senate support both bills, neither can advance because the Republicans can deploy the filibuster, a procedural move that effectively changes the standard for bill passage from a simple majority to a 60-vote threshold. And with Republicans in near-unanimous opposition to both bills, the only path forward appears to be scrapping the filibuster, changing how it can be deployed or creating a “carve out” for voting rights legislation.

Two Democratic senators, Joe Manchin of West Virginia and Kyrsten Sinema of Arizona, have repeatedly said they oppose changing the filibuster rules. But voting rights advocates are still pushing for such a move if Democrats can’t get enough Republicans on board.

Wade Henderson, interim president and CEO of the Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights:

“Some Senate Democrats, including Senators Manchin and Sinema, have been skeptical about changing the rules on the filibuster. But arcane Senate rules must not stand in the way of our democracy. The circumstances of this moment demand action now. We cannot afford to go back to a world reminiscent of Jim Crow — a world of exclusion, control, and violent inequality. For our democracy to work for all of us, it must include us all. Senators from both sides of the aisle must be on the right side of history, allow debate, and pass these crucial bills. However, if Senate Republicans refuse to join in that effort, Democrats must be willing to go it alone.”

Karen Hobert Flynn, president of Common Cause:

“The fight over voting rights has clearly shown that the Senate is broken, and President Biden is right that it is time to fix it. As recently as 2006 every single Senator voted to amend and extend the Voting Rights Act – including 16 who are still in the Senate today – but for the last year, all Senate Republicans, with one exception, have continually voted against voting rights at every turn. If Republicans in the Senate continue to put their party before their nation, then the Senate must act with a majority to protect the fundamental freedom to vote.”

Nick Penniman, CEO of Issue One:

“State legislatures across the country are passing laws to put partisans in charge of elections and overturn results of free and fair elections — that’s what losing our democracy looks like. Congress needs to realize that this moment is bigger than politics as usual. Republicans need to move beyond obstruction and towards presenting constructive ideas. Unless Democrats reform the filibuster, they have to be flexible enough to listen to those ideas. Both sides must move beyond partisanship and do what previous generations of Americans have done – do whatever it takes to save our democracy and safeguard it from those who wish to subvert it.”

Jana Morgan, director of the Declaration for American Democracy:

“To pass these critical bills, Majority Leader Schumer and the Senate must reform its broken system that has long blocked legislation to protect our freedom to vote. We cannot allow Senator McConnell to delay this bill through pretend negotiations and cynical stall tactics. Every minute we delay passing this popular legislation, partisan lawmakers and dark money groups will continue to enact laws that put up deliberate barriers to the ballot box to silence the voices of Black, brown, indigenous, and young Americans.”

Joshua Graham Lynn, CEO of RepresentUs:

“With warning signs blaring all around us that America’s democracy is in peril, President Biden posed the right question today: Will senators choose democracy or autocracy? Will they decide to restore the Senate to a functioning body, or let it atrophy amid crippling gridlock? … But while we’re grateful that the president is more forcefully presenting this stark choice for lawmakers, time is running out. Many senators have stepped up in recent weeks to support rules changes to pass the Freedom to Vote Act, and we hope the president has a concrete plan to get the few remaining holdouts on board.”

Virginia Kase Solomón, CEO of the League of Women Voters

“In his speech, the President forcefully called out those who would obstruct democracy, rightly laying the onus of democracy protection on the U.S. Senate. State legislatures across the country have passed anti-voter bills with a simple majority, while the president noted that the U.S. Senate requires a supermajority to pass voting rights protections. … The Senate would sully the legacy of Dr. King and Congressman Lewis by invoking their names without passing these bills.”

Majorities back election reforms

Meanwhile, new polling by Politico and Morning Consult shows that a majority of Americans favor changes to elections laws even though they do not believe those issues should be a high priority.

A majority of respondents (54 percent) said Congress should make reforming how electoral votes are counted a top or important priority. Sixty percent said the same for expanding voting access, and 57 percent said expanding oversight of states’ election law change should be a top or important priority.

But when asked if any of those three items should be the top priority, none received more than 26 percent of support, with one-third of respondents choosing “none of the above.”

The pollsters also broke out individual elements of the Freedom to Vote Act and the John Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act to gauge support for certain items. A majority either strongly or somewhat supported every one of them.

voting reforms poll

The survey also asked whether Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer should force a change in the filibuster rules. Respondents were split: 37 percent strongly or somewhat supported that idea, while 36 percent somewhat or strongly opposed it.


Read More

Paul Ehrlich was wrong about everything

Crowd of people walking on a street.

Andy Andrews//Getty Images

Paul Ehrlich was wrong about everything

Biologist and author Paul Ehrlich, the most influential Chicken Little of the last century, died at the age of 93 this week. His 1968 book, “The Population Bomb,” launched decades of institutional panic in government, entertainment and journalism.

Ehrlich’s core neo-Malthusian argument was that overpopulation would exhaust the supply of food and natural resources, leading to a cascade of catastrophes around the world. “The Population Bomb” opens with a bold prediction, “The battle to feed all of humanity is over. In the 1970s and 1980s hundreds of millions of people will starve to death in spite of any crash programs embarked upon now.”

Keep ReadingShow less
Bravado Isn’t a Strategy: Why the Iran War Has No Endgame

People clear rubble in a house in the Beryanak District after it was damaged by missile attacks two days before, on March 15, 2026 in Tehran, Iran. The United States and Israel continued their joint attack on Iran that began on February 28. Iran retaliated by firing waves of missiles and drones at Israel, and targeting U.S. allies in the region.

Getty Images, Majid Saeedi

Bravado Isn’t a Strategy: Why the Iran War Has No Endgame

Most of what we have heard from the administration as it pertains to the Iran War is swagger and bro-talk. A few days into the war, the White House released a social media video that combined footage of the bombardment with clips from video games. Not long after, it released a second video, titled “Justice the American Way,” that mixed images of the U.S. military with scenes from movies like Gladiator and Top Gun Maverick.

Speaking to reporters at the Pentagon, War Secretary Pete Hegseth boasted of “death and destruction from the sky all day long.” “They are toast, and they know it,” he said. “This was never meant to be a fair fight... we are punching them while they’re down.”

Keep ReadingShow less
A student in uniform walking through a campus.

A Reserve Officer Training Corps (ROTC) cadet walks through campus November 7, 2003 in Princeton, New Jersey.

Getty Images, Spencer Platt

Hegseth is Dumbing Down the Military (on Purpose)

One day before the United States began an ill-defined and illegal war of indefinite length with Iran, Pete Hegseth angrily attacked a different enemy: the Ivy League. The Secretary of War denounced Ivy League universities as "woke breeding grounds of toxic indoctrination” and then eliminated long-standing college fellowship programs with more than a dozen elite colleges, which had historically served as a pipeline for service members to the upper ranks of military leadership. Of the schools now on Hegseth’s "no-fly list," four sit in the top ten of the World’s Top Universities for 2026. So, why does the Secretary of War not want his armed forces to have the best education available? Because he wants a military without a brain.

For a guy obsessed with being the strongest and most lethal force in the world, cutting access to world-class schools is a bizarre gambit. It does reveal Hegseth doesn’t consider intelligence a factor–let alone an asset–in strength or lethality. That tracks. Hegseth alleges the Ivies infect officers with “globalist and radical ideologies that do not improve our fighting ranks…” God forbid the tip of the sword of our foreign policy has knowledge of international cooperation and global interconnectedness. The Ivy League has its own issues, but the Pentagon’s claim that they "fail to deliver rigorous education grounded in realism” is almost laughable. I’m a veteran Lieutenant Commander with two Ivy League degrees, both paid for with military tuition assistance, and I promise: it was rigorous. Meanwhile, are Hegseth’s performative politics grounded in reality? Attacking Harvard on social media the eve of initiating a new war with a foreign adversary is disgraceful, and even delusional.

Keep ReadingShow less
Are We Prepared for a World Where AI Isn’t at Work?
Person working at a desk with a laptop and books.

Are We Prepared for a World Where AI Isn’t at Work?

Draft an important email without using AI. Write it from scratch — no suggestions, no autocomplete, and no prompt to ChatGPT to compose or revise the email.

Now ask yourself: Did it feel slower? Harder? Slightly uncomfortable?

Keep ReadingShow less