

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.


Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
Diane Alexander is the Communications and Research Director: dalexander@democracy21.org
"For the Senate to preserve our democracy and protect the right to vote, and to be known again as the 'world's greatest deliberative body,' the Senate filibuster rules must be revised," Democracy 21 President Fred Wertheimer writes in the introduction to a new update to the Democracy 21 report: A Timeline Of The Senate Filibuster -- And Why The Filibuster Rules Must Be Revised To Save Democracy And Restore The Senate.
Attacks "on the right to vote and the integrity of our elections have put our democracy at grave risk," Wertheimer writes. "The need to revise the filibuster rules is of paramount importance."
Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) announced the Senate will consider changes to Senate rules as early as this week.
The Freedom to Vote Act and the John Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act are essential voting rights measures that were blocked by multiple Republican filibusters in 2021.
These measures would override the state voter suppression laws triggered by Trump's Big Lie, protect against partisan election administration officials rigging federal election results, and prevent future voter discrimination laws in selected states and local jurisdictions.
"The moment of truth is here," Wertheimer says. "At stake is whether our democracy as we know it will be preserved."
The Democracy 21 report details the history of the Senate filibuster:
The Democracy 21 Timeline Of The Senate Filibuster is online here.
Democracy 21 is a nonprofit, nonpartisan organization dedicated to making democracy work for all Americans. Democracy 21, and its education arm, Democracy 21 Education Fund, work to eliminate the undue influence of big money in American politics, prevent government corruption, empower citizens in the political process and ensure the integrity and fairness of government decisions and elections. The organization promotes campaign finance reform and other related political reforms to accomplish these goals.
(202) 355-9600"Virginia voters have spoken, and tonight they pushed back against a president who claims he is ‘entitled’ to more Republican seats in Congress," said Democratic Gov. Abigail Spanberger.
Virginia voters on Tuesday approved a referendum that's likely to give Democrats four additional seats in the US House of Representatives in the upcoming midterm elections, a key victory in a gerrymandering war launched last year by President Donald Trump and the Republican Party.
"Virginia voters have spoken, and tonight they pushed back against a president who claims he is ‘entitled’ to more Republican seats in Congress," Virginia Gov. Abigail Spanberger, a Democrat, said following Tuesday's vote. "As we watched other states go along with those demands without voter input, Virginians refused to let that stand. We responded the right way: at the ballot box."
The ballot measure, which was approved by a margin of fewer than 100,000 votes, allows the Virginia constitution to be "amended to allow the General Assembly to temporarily adopt new congressional districts to restore fairness in the upcoming elections, while ensuring Virginia's standard redistricting process resumes for all future redistricting after the 2030 census."
The new congressional map that Virginia lawmakers approved earlier this year—prior to putting the ballot question before voters—would aggressively redraw the state's district lines to give Democrats eight safe districts. Two other districts would be competitive but Democratic-leaning, leaving Republicans with just one favorable district. Common Cause Virginia, an advocacy group that does not favor partisan gerrymandering, called the new Virginia maps "a proportionate response" to GOP redistricting in other states, including Texas.
Eric Holder, the former US attorney general and chairman of the National Democratic Redistricting Committee, said in response to Tuesday's result that "the mere existence of this special election stands in stark contrast to the gerrymanders forced on constituents in Texas, Missouri, and North Carolina and shows that voters are tired of Republican attempts to silence their power at the voting booth."
“Virginians’ courageous action today will have an impact far beyond the commonwealth. They didn’t just win an election—they have stopped Donald Trump’s attempt to steal the 2026 midterms in its tracks and defended the principle that elections should be fair, competitive, and decided by the people," said Holder. "Let this be a message to MAGA Republicans and the White House: enough is enough."
Democratic congressional leaders also applauded the outcome of the closely watched Virginia referendum. House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY) said in a statement that "Virginians spoke with a crystal-clear voice, voting to stop the MAGA power grab and protect the integrity of free and fair elections."
But Jeffries stressed that "this war is not over," pointing to ongoing Republican efforts to redraw Florida's congressional maps.
“If Florida Republicans proceed with this illegal scheme, they will only create more prime pick-up opportunities for Democrats, just as they did with Trump’s dummymander in Texas," said Jeffries. "We will aggressively target for defeat Mario Díaz-Balart, Maria Elvira Salazar, Carlos Giménez, Kat Cammack, Anna Paulina Luna, Laurel Lee, Cory Mills, and Brian Mast. We are prepared to take them all on, and we are prepared to win."
Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) responded enthusiastically to Jeffries' statement.
"Hell yes," she wrote on social media. "This is the energy."
"They want to give $140 billion for ICE and Border Patrol without reforms, but $0 to lower Americans’ costs," said Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer.
Congressional Democrats and advocacy groups on Tuesday slammed Senate Republicans' proposed budget resolution, which authorizes up to $140 billion in new deficit spending for Department of Homeland Security agencies responsible for President Donald Trump's deadly immigration crackdown.
Senate Budget Committee Chair Lindsey Graham (R-SC) introduced the fiscal year 2026 budget resolution, which the senator's office described as "the blueprint that unlocks the pathway for a targeted reconciliation bill that will provide funding for US Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and US Customs and Border Protection (CBP)" for at least the remainder of Trump's term.
"The resolution includes reconciliation instructions allowing for up to $70 billion of deficit increases each for the Judiciary and Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs committees," explained the advocacy group Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget.
ICE is already flush with a $75 billion funding boost thanks to Republicans' so-called One Big Beautiful Bill Act, which Trump signed last July 4.
“The threats to our homeland from radical Islam are only getting more intense," Graham said, despite there being no significant attack by such forces on US soil in a decade. "Now is not the time to defund Border Patrol, and now is certainly not the time to put ICE out of business."
"These men and women have been dealing with the consequences of the over 11 million illegal immigrants that came to the United States during the Biden administration," the senator added.
There is no evidence that anywhere near that number of undocumented migrants entered the US during former President Joe Biden's tenure.
Responding to Graham's proposal, Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) said: "Earlier today, we caught our first glimpse of the Senate Republicans’ budget resolution. Forget being on the same page, Republicans aren’t even on the same planet as the American people."
"They want to give $140 billion for ICE and Border Patrol without reforms, but $0 to lower Americans’ costs," he continued. "Let me say that again: $140 billion for ICE and Border Patrol—no reforms, no accountability, no strings attached; $0 to lower Americans’ costs."
"That’s their priority. That’s why they are dragging the Senate through the arduous, convoluted reconciliation process: to put money in the coffers of Trump’s rogue agencies, rather than in Americans’ pockets," Schumer said.
"Democrats want to lower Americans’ grocery, gas, healthcare, and housing costs. Senate Republicans want to appease Donald Trump... by giving ICE and Border Patrol tens of billions of dollars to continue spreading violence in our streets," he added.
Center for American Progress (CAP) senior director of federal budget policy Bobby Kogan called the GOP budget proposal "a missed opportunity to help Americans."
"In addition to doing nothing to rein in DHS, many civil and human rights abuses, congressional Republicans’ reconciliation plan misses an opportunity to do affirmative good for struggling households," he said.
Kogan continued:
While there was broad agreement in Congress on the funding levels for the agencies within DHS itself, congressional Democratic leadership asked for a handful of reforms to try to prevent more killings of citizens and noncitizens and avoid another wave of other civil rights violations from being undertaken by the department. Congressional Republican leadership has rejected calls for legislative reforms to ICE and Border Patrol operations and is now instead using this process to provide funding with no oversight.
The Republican proposal comes as immigrant deaths in ICE custody have soared, with at least 17 people dying since January. DHS officers have also killed two US citizens, Renee Good and Alex Pretti, during the Operation Metro Surge blitz in Minneapolis.
One expert stressed that "trust between the sides remains at zero."
President Donald Trump on Tuesday afternoon extended a two-week ceasefire for his and Israel's war on Iran, but the US leader also said that a naval blockade of the Mideast nation will continue, and fears of fresh attacks remain high.
Two weeks after threatening to take out the "whole civilization" of Iran just hours before the ceasefire agreement was reached, Trump took to his Truth Social platform again to announce the extension, without a clear timeline.
"Based on the fact that the Government of Iran is seriously fractured, not unexpectedly so and, upon the request of Field Marshal Asim Munir, and Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif, of Pakistan, we have been asked to hold our Attack on the Country of Iran until such time as their leaders and representatives can come up with a unified proposal," Trump wrote. "I have therefore directed our Military to continue the Blockade and, in all other respects, remain ready and able, and will therefore extend the Ceasefire until such time as their proposal is submitted, and discussions are concluded, one way or the other."
Trump has imposed the blockade in response to Iran's closure of the Strait of Hormuz, a waterway between the Persian Gulf and the Gulf of Oman that's a key trade route, including for fossil fuels. As part of the blockade, the president said Sunday, US forces seized Touska, a nearly 900-foot Iranian-flagged cargo ship.
Trita Parsi, co-founder and executive vice president of the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft, concluded Tuesday that Trump's cave "reflects the outcome I have argued is the most likely: No deal, no sanctions relief, no nuclear compromise, no return to war, while Iran continues to control the strait. Not a stable situation, but one in which Trump pockets the central thing he sought—exiting the war—while Iran is bereft of the main thing it was looking for: sanctions lifting."
While a spokesperson for United Nations Secretary-General António Guterres said that he welcomes Trump's announcement as "an important step toward de-escalation and creating critical space for diplomacy and confidence-building between Iran and the United States," and encouraged all parties "to build on this momentum," comments out of Iran suggested limited progress.
Drop Site News co-founder Jeremy Scahill reported Tuesday that "an Iranian official tells me that, as of this moment, Iran's position remains unchanged: Lifting of the naval blockade is a condition for a second round of talks."
According to Reuters chief national security reporter Phil Stewart, an adviser to Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf, speaker of Iran's Parliament, said that Tuesday's extension means nothing and could even be a ploy to buy time for a surprise strike, plus the US continuing its blockade is the same as bombardment and must be met with military force.
Noting Stewart's reporting on social media, Center for International Policy senior fellow Sina Toossi noted that reporting and warned that "after coming under surprise attack twice, some in Tehran are calling for Iran to take initiative and strike first, including at US vessels or tankers ready to exit Hormuz."
Toossi also stressed that "trust between the sides remains at zero and renewed war could break out at any time."
"Let's be real, Pakistan isn't deciding whether the US goes to war with Iran," he added. "They're a conduit, not a driver. More a convenient excuse and diplomatic cover than having any sort of actual influence over Trump on Iran."
Ahead of the extension, Toossi had published an op-ed in The Guardian arguing that "having fought what they see as an existential war with the US and Israel and held their ground, Iranian officials see little reason to rush into major concessions. The priority is not a sweeping deal, but reducing the risk of war while preserving core sources of power, from Hormuz to its nuclear program."
"In the short term, that may simply mean extending the ceasefire rather than reaching a substantive agreement. Beyond that, the likelier outcome is an interim arrangement, or a broad memorandum-of-understanding-style framework that defers key details, rather than a decisive breakthrough," he continued. "In this view, the conflict is not being resolved but managed—and with time, Iran believes its position will strengthen as the global fallout from energy disruption makes renewed escalation a cost no one is willing to bear."
A Tuesday report from the climate advocacy group 350.org estimates that during the first 50 days of the Iran war, consumers and businesses worldwide have paid an additional $158.6-166.9 billion due to soaring fuel costs.
Additionally, thousands of people have been killed in Iran and across the region, and at least tens of thousands of Iranian civilian infrastructure sites have been damaged since the US and Israel first launched attacks in February.