The ongoing debate about whether the Senate should use the nuclear option to end the filibuster is one of those classic Washington crossroads where everyone wants fast results but no one wants to talk honestly about the long-term consequences. I have always believed in strong, confident leadership, and President Trump embodies that better than anyone on the national stage today. His instinct to cut through dysfunction is exactly why so many Americans trust him to steer the country back on course.
Still, even with a president who knows how to get things done, the Senate has to think carefully before it makes a change this significant. The filibuster is far from perfect, but it has always acted as a guardrail that slows down the most extreme impulses on both sides. It forces people who disagree to sit at the same table and actually talk—maybe not happily, maybe not quickly, but talk nonetheless. Ending it might offer a short-term victory, but it also opens the door to consequences no one can fully control.
Let’s be honest: power in Washington never stays with one party forever. While President Trump would use a faster Senate to strengthen our borders, grow our economy, and protect American families, we must consider what would happen if Democrats eventually take the majority again. They have shown, time and time again, that they are willing to use every tool at their disposal to push sweeping changes the American people never asked for.
If the filibuster is gone, they would have a clear runway to pass laws that fundamentally reshape the country. They could federalize elections, expand the Supreme Court, or force radical energy policies into place before anyone had time to blink.
So yes, reforming the system matters. But permanently removing a key part of the Senate’s design is something the country must approach with real caution. Sometimes taking a breath and thinking ahead is the most patriotic thing we can do.