Van Hollen Vows to Kill Filibuster — Thune Kept It for 'Norms'

Sen. Chris Van Hollen pledged Friday to abolish the Senate filibuster the moment Democrats reclaim the majority, vowing to let 51 senators ram through whatever they want — while Republican leader John Thune spent his tenure preserving the same rule in the name of Senate "norms."

The Maryland Democrat, now mounting a serious challenge to Chuck Schumer for Senate majority leader, made the remarks at the What's Next conference in Denver. The stake for ordinary Americans is straightforward: the 60-vote threshold is the last procedural mechanism that forces the party in power to negotiate with the minority. Kill it, and the party that holds 51 seats and the White House can pass nearly anything with no input from the other half of the country.

Van Hollen was blunt about his intentions. "My personal opinion is that we need democracy in the United States Senate, and that means allowing, ultimately, a majority of senators to answer the call of the American people. So that means 51 votes," he told reporters. He called the filibuster "an anti-democratic — small 'd' — provision," adding: "It's not in our Constitution. It was put in there by senators to enhance their power over the power of the people."

The Post Millennial noted that Thune "has repeatedly rejected calls to eliminate or change the 60-vote filibuster to protect the institutional norms of the Senate." That is the one-sided suicide pact in a single sentence. The Republican leader protected the tool his counterpart now promises to destroy. Republicans disarmed for decorum. Democrats are loading the chamber.

The guardrails that stopped this last time are gone. In January 2022, most Senate Democrats voted to change the filibuster rule to push through voting rights legislation under President Biden. That effort failed only because centrist senators Joe Manchin and Kyrsten Sinema broke ranks. As The Post Millennial reported, neither senator is still in Congress.

Van Hollen's pledge comes as he builds real momentum against Schumer. Rolling Stone reported that of 13 incoming Democratic senators, only Sherrod Brown of Ohio has publicly pledged to support Schumer. Sen.-elect Abdul El-Sayed of Michigan threw his support to Van Hollen, writing on X: "I called on Sen Chris Van Hollen to lead our caucus as a candidate back in April because he leads with courage and experience. We need both right now." Sen.-elect Peggy Flanagan of Minnesota also backed Van Hollen: "Minnesotans are demanding change. Democrats need to deliver. That starts with new voices in our leadership."

Schumer's claim that he personally recruited the candidates who flipped the Senate is falling flat with his own caucus. Scott Colom, the first Black senator from Mississippi since Reconstruction, told CBS it was "not accurate" to say Schumer recruited him: "The people of Mississippi recruited me… You think I was listening to someone that lives in Brooklyn?"

The two outlets framed the story differently. The Post Millennial led with the filibuster pledge and the procedural stakes. Rolling Stone buried the filibuster angle entirely, treating Van Hollen's challenge to Schumer as a generational change story about recruitment credit and freshman revolt. Both are true. But the filibuster pledge is the part that outlasts the leadership race.

With President Trump still in office, any Democratic legislation would face a veto. The Post Millennial noted the real concern: a scenario where Democrats abolish the filibuster and then win the presidency in 2028, giving them unrestricted ability to pass legislation with no Republican input.

The question isn't whether Democrats will pull the trigger. Van Hollen just said he will. The question is whether Senate Republicans understood that the rules they preserved in office will not be returned to them in opposition.