During a press conference Tuesday, Mitch McConnell, Republican Senate Minority Leader claimed that the legislative filibuster has “no racial history at all” and further asserted that historians don’t dispute his view—an assertion that was immediately disputed by historians.
“Strom Thurmond disagrees,” historian Patrick Wyman tweeted, referring to the late Republican senator whose 24-hour filibuster against the Civil Rights Act of 1957 remains the longest in U.S. history.
- Here’s How and When Mount Everest-sized ‘Devil Comet’ Can Be Seen With Naked Eye
- Something Fascinating Happened When a Giant Quantum Vortex was Created in Superfluid Helium
- The Science of Middle-aged Brain and the Best Thing You Can Do to Keep it Healthy, Revealed
- Science Shock: Salmon’s Food Choices Better at Reducing Risk of Heart Disease and Stroke
- For the First Time: Scientists Say They Have Found Lung Cancer’s Achilles’ Heel
Strom Thurmond disagrees. On the other hand, though, if he can stand there and lie and have credulous reporters repeat his words verbatim, why not just say whatever he feels like? https://t.co/ZqQOOf0DhY
— Patrick Wyman (@Patrick_Wyman) March 23, 2021
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.'”
Historian of the 20th century South here. I dispute Mitch's statement. The filibuster has a ton of "racial history." https://t.co/XpPwAaP3rT
— Chuck Westmoreland (@chwestmo7) March 23, 2021
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:
Filibuster against civil rights bill, 1874
— Kevin M. Kruse (@KevinMKruse) March 23, 2021
Filibuster against civil rights bill, 1875
Filibuster against a pension for a black official, 1906
Filibuster against confirmation of a black official, 1909 pic.twitter.com/FGBIGvARkQ
Filibuster against civil rights bill, 1874
— Kevin M. Kruse (@KevinMKruse) March 23, 2021
Filibuster against civil rights bill, 1875
Filibuster against a pension for a black official, 1906
Filibuster against confirmation of a black official, 1909 pic.twitter.com/FGBIGvARkQ
Filibuster against civil rights bill, 1874
— Kevin M. Kruse (@KevinMKruse) March 23, 2021
Filibuster against civil rights bill, 1875
Filibuster against a pension for a black official, 1906
Filibuster against confirmation of a black official, 1909 pic.twitter.com/FGBIGvARkQ
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.
Great question. McConnell's answer is false. His office is trying to clean it up but he said what he said. For more than a century the filibuster was widely understood to be primarily dedicated to maintaining white supremacy and blocking civil rights. Here's Russell in 1949. https://t.co/A5GLiPDzbg pic.twitter.com/BRAfQrFV5c
— Adam Jentleson ???? (@AJentleson) March 23, 2021
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.
- Here’s How and When Mount Everest-sized ‘Devil Comet’ Can Be Seen With Naked Eye
- Something Fascinating Happened When a Giant Quantum Vortex was Created in Superfluid Helium
- The Science of Middle-aged Brain and the Best Thing You Can Do to Keep it Healthy, Revealed
- Science Shock: Salmon’s Food Choices Better at Reducing Risk of Heart Disease and Stroke
- For the First Time: Scientists Say They Have Found Lung Cancer’s Achilles’ Heel
“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.”
Sen. McConnell is scared. He knows the filibuster is his key to maintaining power from the minority & preventing Dems from delivering on their promises, & he sees his grip on that weapon of partisan obstruction slipping away. Let's keep this momentum going to #FixOurSenate! https://t.co/RIldrIRiLr
— Eli Zupnick (@elizupnick) March 16, 2021