Let Trump
Veto.

I’m advocating a two-year pause on the legislative filibuster so majority-supported bills can reach a final Senate vote. Let Democrats show the public what they can agree on and put into legislation. If Trump wants to be “Mr. Veto,” let him take responsibility for blocking those bills rather than letting the Senate minority block them first.

In a November 3, 2026 interview, Trump described using vetoes to push Democrats toward negotiations. He also discussed making deals. The point here is his stated willingness to veto Democratic legislation, not a claim that he would reject every bill. Read the CBS News interview report.

No. The familiar 60-vote threshold generally concerns ending debate on ordinary legislation, not final passage. Exceptions exist, including certain budget measures. See the Senate’s explanation of filibusters and cloture.

No. A bill must pass both the House and Senate in the same form before being presented to the president. Trump could sign it or veto it; other constitutional outcomes are also possible. Congress can override a veto with two-thirds votes in both chambers. See Article I, Section 7 of the Constitution.

This proposal responds to a particular political moment: Trump has openly embraced his willingness to veto Democratic legislation. For the final two years of his presidency, let Congress put its priorities on his desk to be vetoed, and let the public judge the results.

I favor an explicit sunset, so the usual filibuster procedures return automatically without another vote. A future Senate could still change its procedures again. Removing this hurdle could also help pass legislation I oppose.

Yes. In 2013, Senate Democrats established a simple-majority threshold for ending debate on nominations other than Supreme Court nominees. In 2017, Senate Republicans extended majority cloture to Supreme Court nominations. These were changes to the threshold for ending debate, not the vote needed for confirmation. They show that even consequential Senate procedures have changed under both parties. Senate history of judicial nominations.

There is also precedent for automatic expiration. Separately, in 2013, the Senate adopted temporary standing orders affecting how bills were brought up and how long certain nominations could be considered after debate was limited. Both sections included explicit sunset clauses. Those were narrower changes than the legislative filibuster pause proposed here. Read S.Res.15, including its sunset provisions.

That is the model I favor: a two-year exception that expires automatically, rather than a permanent change followed by a promise to reverse it. A sunset would not prevent a future Senate from changing its procedures, and adopting the exception would still require overcoming existing procedural barriers. Congressional Research Service explanation.

This site expresses the author’s personal political opinion. It does not speak for a candidate, political party, or government agency.

Cloudflare may collect basic traffic and performance statistics, such as page views and referring websites, and process routine hosting logs. Sharing links opens external services whose own privacy policies apply.