Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) talks to reporters following the weekly Republican policy luncheon in the Hart Senate Office Building on Capitol Hill. (Photo: Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images)
Mar 24, 2021
Republican Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell on Tuesday made the sweeping claim that the legislative filibuster has "no racial history at all" and further insisted that historians don't dispute his view--an assertion that historians immediately disputed.
"Strom Thurmond disagrees," tweeted historian Patrick Wyman, referring to the late Republican senator from South Carolina whose 24-hour filibuster against the Civil Rights Act of 1957 remains the longest in U.S. history.
During a press briefing Tuesday, McConnell offered a full-throated defense of the filibuster amid growing calls by Senate Democrats to significantly weaken or abolish the 60-vote rule, which in its current form gives the minority party enormous power to block legislation. Progressive advocacy groups and some Democratic lawmakers have taken to describing the filibuster as a "Jim Crow relic" to denote its past use as a weapon against civil rights legislation.
"It has no racial history at all. None. So, there's no dispute among historians about that," said McConnell, who stood by the GOP's intention to use the filibuster to block the For the People Act, Democratic legislation aiming to expand ballot access as Republicans press ahead with sweeping voter suppression measures at the state level.
"Historian of the 20th century South here. I dispute Mitch's statement," responded Charles Westmoreland, a professor of history at Delta State University in Mississippi. "The filibuster has a ton of 'racial history.'"
\u201c@mmcauliff Mitch McConnell: The filibuster has "no racial history at all. None. There's no dispute among historians."\n\n(This is exceedingly untrue.)\nhttps://t.co/8K44VydQNl\u201d— Michael McAuliff (@Michael McAuliff) 1616523866
Kevin Kruse, professor of history at Princeton University, offered a non-exhaustive list of filibuster use against civil rights and anti-lynching legislation over the past 150 years:
\u201cFilibuster against civil rights bill, 1874\n\nFilibuster against civil rights bill, 1875\n\nFilibuster against a pension for a black official, 1906\n\nFilibuster against confirmation of a black official, 1909\u201d— Kevin M. Kruse (@Kevin M. Kruse) 1616533657
\u201cFilibuster against anti-lynching bill, 1921\n\nFilibuster against anti-lynching bill, 1922\n\nFilibuster against anti-lynching bill, 1925\n\nFilibuster against monument to black WWI veterans, 1926\u201d— Kevin M. Kruse (@Kevin M. Kruse) 1616533657
\u201cFilibuster against anti-lynching bill, 1935\n\nFilibuster against anti-lynching bill, 1938\n\nFilibuster against bill targeting racial discrimination in employment, 1945\n\nFilibuster against Truman's civil rights proposals, 1948\u201d— Kevin M. Kruse (@Kevin M. Kruse) 1616533657
Adam Jentleson, executive director of the Battle Born Collective and the author of a new book on the history of the Senate, wrote Tuesday that "McConnell's argument that the filibuster 'has no racial history at all' is the new 'the Civil War wasn't about slavery.'"
"For more than a century the filibuster was widely understood to be primarily dedicated to maintaining white supremacy and blocking civil rights," Jentleson noted, quoting a defense of the filibuster offered in 1949 by the late Democratic senator and arch-segregationist Richard Russell of Georgia.
In recent weeks, McConnell has repeatedly risen to the defense of the legislative filibuster and threatened to unleash "chaos" on the upper chamber if Democrats target the 60-vote rule, which is currently standing in the way of immigration and labor law reform, gun safety legislation, climate action, and other top priorities of the majority party.
"McConnell is scared," argued Eli Zupnick of the advocacy group Fix Our Senate. "He knows the filibuster is his key to maintaining power from the minority and preventing Dems from delivering on their promises, and he sees his grip on that weapon of partisan obstruction slipping away."
An Urgent Message From Our Co-Founder
Dear Common Dreams reader, The U.S. is on a fast track to authoritarianism like nothing I've ever seen. Meanwhile, corporate news outlets are utterly capitulating to Trump, twisting their coverage to avoid drawing his ire while lining up to stuff cash in his pockets. That's why I believe that Common Dreams is doing the best and most consequential reporting that we've ever done. Our small but mighty team is a progressive reporting powerhouse, covering the news every day that the corporate media never will. Our mission has always been simple: To inform. To inspire. And to ignite change for the common good. Now here's the key piece that I want all our readers to understand: None of this would be possible without your financial support. That's not just some fundraising cliche. It's the absolute and literal truth. We don't accept corporate advertising and never will. We don't have a paywall because we don't think people should be blocked from critical news based on their ability to pay. Everything we do is funded by the donations of readers like you. Our Summer Campaign is now underway, and there’s never been a more urgent time for Common Dreams to be as vigilant as possible. Will you donate now to help power the nonprofit, independent reporting of Common Dreams? Thank you for being a vital member of our community. Together, we can keep independent journalism alive when it’s needed most. - Craig Brown, Co-founder |
Our work is licensed under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0). Feel free to republish and share widely.
Republican Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell on Tuesday made the sweeping claim that the legislative filibuster has "no racial history at all" and further insisted that historians don't dispute his view--an assertion that historians immediately disputed.
"Strom Thurmond disagrees," tweeted historian Patrick Wyman, referring to the late Republican senator from South Carolina whose 24-hour filibuster against the Civil Rights Act of 1957 remains the longest in U.S. history.
During a press briefing Tuesday, McConnell offered a full-throated defense of the filibuster amid growing calls by Senate Democrats to significantly weaken or abolish the 60-vote rule, which in its current form gives the minority party enormous power to block legislation. Progressive advocacy groups and some Democratic lawmakers have taken to describing the filibuster as a "Jim Crow relic" to denote its past use as a weapon against civil rights legislation.
"It has no racial history at all. None. So, there's no dispute among historians about that," said McConnell, who stood by the GOP's intention to use the filibuster to block the For the People Act, Democratic legislation aiming to expand ballot access as Republicans press ahead with sweeping voter suppression measures at the state level.
"Historian of the 20th century South here. I dispute Mitch's statement," responded Charles Westmoreland, a professor of history at Delta State University in Mississippi. "The filibuster has a ton of 'racial history.'"
\u201c@mmcauliff Mitch McConnell: The filibuster has "no racial history at all. None. There's no dispute among historians."\n\n(This is exceedingly untrue.)\nhttps://t.co/8K44VydQNl\u201d— Michael McAuliff (@Michael McAuliff) 1616523866
Kevin Kruse, professor of history at Princeton University, offered a non-exhaustive list of filibuster use against civil rights and anti-lynching legislation over the past 150 years:
\u201cFilibuster against civil rights bill, 1874\n\nFilibuster against civil rights bill, 1875\n\nFilibuster against a pension for a black official, 1906\n\nFilibuster against confirmation of a black official, 1909\u201d— Kevin M. Kruse (@Kevin M. Kruse) 1616533657
\u201cFilibuster against anti-lynching bill, 1921\n\nFilibuster against anti-lynching bill, 1922\n\nFilibuster against anti-lynching bill, 1925\n\nFilibuster against monument to black WWI veterans, 1926\u201d— Kevin M. Kruse (@Kevin M. Kruse) 1616533657
\u201cFilibuster against anti-lynching bill, 1935\n\nFilibuster against anti-lynching bill, 1938\n\nFilibuster against bill targeting racial discrimination in employment, 1945\n\nFilibuster against Truman's civil rights proposals, 1948\u201d— Kevin M. Kruse (@Kevin M. Kruse) 1616533657
Adam Jentleson, executive director of the Battle Born Collective and the author of a new book on the history of the Senate, wrote Tuesday that "McConnell's argument that the filibuster 'has no racial history at all' is the new 'the Civil War wasn't about slavery.'"
"For more than a century the filibuster was widely understood to be primarily dedicated to maintaining white supremacy and blocking civil rights," Jentleson noted, quoting a defense of the filibuster offered in 1949 by the late Democratic senator and arch-segregationist Richard Russell of Georgia.
In recent weeks, McConnell has repeatedly risen to the defense of the legislative filibuster and threatened to unleash "chaos" on the upper chamber if Democrats target the 60-vote rule, which is currently standing in the way of immigration and labor law reform, gun safety legislation, climate action, and other top priorities of the majority party.
"McConnell is scared," argued Eli Zupnick of the advocacy group Fix Our Senate. "He knows the filibuster is his key to maintaining power from the minority and preventing Dems from delivering on their promises, and he sees his grip on that weapon of partisan obstruction slipping away."
Republican Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell on Tuesday made the sweeping claim that the legislative filibuster has "no racial history at all" and further insisted that historians don't dispute his view--an assertion that historians immediately disputed.
"Strom Thurmond disagrees," tweeted historian Patrick Wyman, referring to the late Republican senator from South Carolina whose 24-hour filibuster against the Civil Rights Act of 1957 remains the longest in U.S. history.
During a press briefing Tuesday, McConnell offered a full-throated defense of the filibuster amid growing calls by Senate Democrats to significantly weaken or abolish the 60-vote rule, which in its current form gives the minority party enormous power to block legislation. Progressive advocacy groups and some Democratic lawmakers have taken to describing the filibuster as a "Jim Crow relic" to denote its past use as a weapon against civil rights legislation.
"It has no racial history at all. None. So, there's no dispute among historians about that," said McConnell, who stood by the GOP's intention to use the filibuster to block the For the People Act, Democratic legislation aiming to expand ballot access as Republicans press ahead with sweeping voter suppression measures at the state level.
"Historian of the 20th century South here. I dispute Mitch's statement," responded Charles Westmoreland, a professor of history at Delta State University in Mississippi. "The filibuster has a ton of 'racial history.'"
\u201c@mmcauliff Mitch McConnell: The filibuster has "no racial history at all. None. There's no dispute among historians."\n\n(This is exceedingly untrue.)\nhttps://t.co/8K44VydQNl\u201d— Michael McAuliff (@Michael McAuliff) 1616523866
Kevin Kruse, professor of history at Princeton University, offered a non-exhaustive list of filibuster use against civil rights and anti-lynching legislation over the past 150 years:
\u201cFilibuster against civil rights bill, 1874\n\nFilibuster against civil rights bill, 1875\n\nFilibuster against a pension for a black official, 1906\n\nFilibuster against confirmation of a black official, 1909\u201d— Kevin M. Kruse (@Kevin M. Kruse) 1616533657
\u201cFilibuster against anti-lynching bill, 1921\n\nFilibuster against anti-lynching bill, 1922\n\nFilibuster against anti-lynching bill, 1925\n\nFilibuster against monument to black WWI veterans, 1926\u201d— Kevin M. Kruse (@Kevin M. Kruse) 1616533657
\u201cFilibuster against anti-lynching bill, 1935\n\nFilibuster against anti-lynching bill, 1938\n\nFilibuster against bill targeting racial discrimination in employment, 1945\n\nFilibuster against Truman's civil rights proposals, 1948\u201d— Kevin M. Kruse (@Kevin M. Kruse) 1616533657
Adam Jentleson, executive director of the Battle Born Collective and the author of a new book on the history of the Senate, wrote Tuesday that "McConnell's argument that the filibuster 'has no racial history at all' is the new 'the Civil War wasn't about slavery.'"
"For more than a century the filibuster was widely understood to be primarily dedicated to maintaining white supremacy and blocking civil rights," Jentleson noted, quoting a defense of the filibuster offered in 1949 by the late Democratic senator and arch-segregationist Richard Russell of Georgia.
In recent weeks, McConnell has repeatedly risen to the defense of the legislative filibuster and threatened to unleash "chaos" on the upper chamber if Democrats target the 60-vote rule, which is currently standing in the way of immigration and labor law reform, gun safety legislation, climate action, and other top priorities of the majority party.
"McConnell is scared," argued Eli Zupnick of the advocacy group Fix Our Senate. "He knows the filibuster is his key to maintaining power from the minority and preventing Dems from delivering on their promises, and he sees his grip on that weapon of partisan obstruction slipping away."
We've had enough. The 1% own and operate the corporate media. They are doing everything they can to defend the status quo, squash dissent and protect the wealthy and the powerful. The Common Dreams media model is different. We cover the news that matters to the 99%. Our mission? To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. How? Nonprofit. Independent. Reader-supported. Free to read. Free to republish. Free to share. With no advertising. No paywalls. No selling of your data. Thousands of small donations fund our newsroom and allow us to continue publishing. Can you chip in? We can't do it without you. Thank you.