Killing the filibuster to kill the unborn

Abortion was in the news again this week as Democratic presidential nominee Kamala Harris continued to put the issue front and center in her campaign. In an interview on Monday with Wisconsin Public Radio—and Wisconsin is one of the critical swing states whose outcome could determine the results of the election—Harris said, “I’ve been very clear. I think we should eliminate the filibuster for Roe.”

In 2022, Harris said that if Democrats took control of the Senate, they could pass abortion and voting reform legislation, ending “those archaic Senate rules that are standing in the way of those two issues.” The vice president added that in her role as president of the Senate, “I cannot wait to cast the deciding vote to break the filibuster on voting rights and reproductive rights. I cannot wait.”

Her comments on Monday were quickly echoed by Democratic Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, who said Senate Democrats would discuss creating a “carveout” to pass abortion rights legislation if they hold the majority next year.

Harris and Schumer are referring to the long-standing rule of the Senate that requires 60 affirmative votes to end debate and proceed with consideration of a bill. That threshold has been watered down in recent years, beginning in 2013 when Democratic Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid invoked the so-called “nuclear option” to reduce the threshold to a simple majority to confirm President Barack Obama’s Cabinet nominees. Republican Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell expanded on Reid’s precedent by lowering the threshold for Supreme Court confirmations to put Justice Neil Gorsuch on the bench in 2017.

Eliminating the rule and reducing the threshold to pass legislation to a simple majority has become a cause célèbre as Democratic senators have focused their ire on the filibuster as a major impediment to the enactment of their agenda. Two outspoken critics of filibuster reform, Sens. Kyrsten Sinema and Joe Manchin (who were once Democrats but are now independents), prevented changes the last time Democrats controlled the House, Senate, and White House in 2021 and 2022. But both senators are retiring at the end of the current Congress. The Democratic candidate to replace Sinema, Ruben Gallego, has voiced support for ending the filibuster, calling it “a tool of obstruction.”

If the filibuster is eliminated for legislation, Democratic senators are poised to push through the Women’s Health Protection Act. The bill, co-sponsored by 46 Democrats and three independents who caucus with them, would expand access to abortion far beyond the legal framework of Roe and Casey, which recognized that governments have a legitimate interest in protecting unborn life. Thomas Jipping, a senior legal fellow with The Heritage Foundation, writes that the bill “would prohibit any government anywhere from doing anything that could, even potentially, reduce the number of abortions from actually taking place. Not only that, it would require every government everywhere to repeal any statutes, regulations, or anything else that may already be on the books that could potentially have that effect.”

The Women’s Health Protection Act reflects the standard Democratic position on abortion: unfettered, taxpayer-funded access to abortion at any time for any reason. It is an extraordinary position not shared by the American people. Even the majority who describe themselves as “pro-choice” favor restrictions on late-term abortion and support parental consent requirements and other health and safety regulations. That sentiment is reflected in the current makeup of the Senate, where such a far-left position can’t pass. That’s why Democrats seek to change the rules and thrust their unpopular, unwanted agenda on the public through sheer force of will.

Vice President Harris’ own words underline the fact that she is willing to do whatever it takes to make sure death in the womb remains the highest priority of today’s Democratic Party.