Why Kyrsten Sinema's fears about a post-filibuster GOP may be exaggerated

Kyrsten Sinema.
(Image credit: Samuel Corum/Getty Images)

Sen. Kyrsten Sinema (D-Ariz.) explained why she opposes nuking the filibuster in an op-ed published by The Washington Post on Tuesday night, citing fears that the Republican Party would rescind major Democrat-backed legislation, like sweeping voting reform measures or expanded health-care access or retirement benefits, and replace them with pared down, more restrictive laws.

In a rebuttal, New York's Jonathan Chait argues that Sinema's filibuster defense "relies on utterly false grounds." He writes that much of what Sinema said she wants to protect by preserving the 60-vote threshold, including funding for Medicare, Medicaid, and women's reproductive services, can be slashed via budget reconciliation, which, as Democrats displayed earlier this year when passing coronavirus relief funding, requires only a simple majority vote. And while Sinema also cites clean and air water regulations that can't be repealed through reconciliation, Chait points out that their enforcement can be "defunded, or simply curtailed through administrative neglect, neither of which is subject to filibustering."

Subscribe to The Week

Escape your echo chamber. Get the facts behind the news, plus analysis from multiple perspectives.

SUBSCRIBE & SAVE
https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/flexiimages/jacafc5zvs1692883516.jpg

Sign up for The Week's Free Newsletters

From our morning news briefing to a weekly Good News Newsletter, get the best of The Week delivered directly to your inbox.

From our morning news briefing to a weekly Good News Newsletter, get the best of The Week delivered directly to your inbox.

Sign up
Explore More
Tim O'Donnell

Tim is a staff writer at The Week and has contributed to Bedford and Bowery and The New York Transatlantic. He is a graduate of Occidental College and NYU's journalism school. Tim enjoys writing about baseball, Europe, and extinct megafauna. He lives in New York City.