By continuing to use our site, you agree to our Private Policy and Terms of Use.
Sinema, the first out bisexual in Congress, said the rule is necessary to build consensus. Also, as she leaves office, she is being accused of misusing campaign funds for extensive and expensive travel.
U.S. Sen. Kyrsten Sinema of Arizona, the first out bisexual in Congress, defended her support for the filibuster — something that has blocked progressive legislation — in her farewell speech, delivered December 18.
Keep up with the latest in LGBTQ+ news and politics. Sign up for The Advocate's email newsletter.
Sinema, who was a member of the Arizona legislature and the U.S. House before being elected to the Senate in 2018, was a liberal for much of her career but became more conservative during her single Senate term. She switched her party affiliation from Democratic to independent in 2022 but continued to caucus with the Democrats.
She and Sen. Joe Manchin of West Virginia were the primary Democrats to support continuing the filibuster, a rule under which 60 senators must vote to end debate on a bill before voting on the bill itself. Voting rights legislation, designed to override restrictions adopted in several states, failed to pass in 2022 because it fell short of the 60-vote threshold needed to break a filibuster, and the same thing happened to a reproductive rights bill. The Equality Act, a comprehensive LGBTQ+ rights bill, did not come to a vote in the Senate during her term, but if it had, the filibuster would likely have stood in its way too.
Neither Sinema nor Manchin ran for reelection this year. Sinema will be replaced by Democrat Ruben Gallego, a U.S. House member who beat Republican Kari Lake in November, and Manchin by Republican Jim Justice, the West Virginia governor who bested Democrat Glenn Elliott.
“When holding political power and feeling the hunger and pressure for an immediate partisan win, it is easy to view the legislative filibuster as a weapon of obstruction,” Sinema said in her farewell speech. “It is tempting to prefer elimination of the filibuster to compromise.”
“It certainly feels faster, easier, and more satisfying, at least in the short term, that is, but there are dangers to choosing short-term victories over the hard — and necessary — work of building consensus,” she continued.
“To give in to the temptation of the short-term victory means giving into the chaos caused by the constant ricocheting of laws, or it means you labor under an illusion that by eliminating the filibuster you’ll maintain political power forever, effectively ending our two-party system. That’s a fallacy, and worse, it’s scary. One-party rule is not democracy, that’s autocracy. That’s not the system our forefathers envisioned, and it’s not what our country deserves.”
However, the U.S. House has no filibuster rule — legislation there needs only a simple majority to pass.
In her speech, Sinema touted the bipartisan work that went into passing an infrastructure bill, gun safety legislation, and the Respect for Marriage Act, which wrote marriage equality into federal law, offering some protection against future negative action by the Supreme Court.
She also criticized the so-called “nuclear option,” which lowered the threshold for confirming federal judicial nominees from 60 votes to 51. It was lowered for nominees other than Supreme Court justices in 2013 and for the Supreme Court in 2017.
“In 2013, judicial nominees weren’t confirmed at a fast enough pace for the majority, so one party lowered the 60-vote threshold to a simple majority,” she said. “And while one political party [Democrats] started it, the other [Republicans] finished it. And now all federal judges, including Supreme Court nominees, are confirmed with just 51 votes.
“Just nine short years after that, half the country was shocked and disappointed when the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade.But it was no surprise at all – it was a foreseeable, predictable result of eliminating the Senate standard that requires broad bipartisan support for judicial nominees. No longer is the majority party required to nominate mainstream judges who earn support from across the political spectrum. Now it’s just a race to get your guys into the spots while you have power. And yet some wonder why public trust in our judiciary is at an all-time low.”
She warned that Republicans may try to end the filibuster now. They will have a 53-47 majority when the Senate is seated in January, whereas Democrats previously held a 51-49 majority, including four independents who caucused with the Democrats. “As we approach the 119th Congress, Republicans will control the presidency, the Senate, and the House, and sadly I’m already hearing rumors of a hunger to subvert these norms, indeed to use reconciliation as a tool to circumvent the filibuster,” she said. “But the end result of that short-sighted action would be the same.
“As history has shown, abusing or eliminating one tool for short-term gain means the other party will do the same when it regains political power. It is a devolution.”
- YouTubewww.youtube.com
As she leaves office, Sinema is facing additional criticism of her travel expenses. Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington filed a complaint December 17 with the Federal Election Commission seeking an investigation of Sinema and her principal campaign committee, Sinema for Arizona, “for apparent direct and serious violations of the Federal Election Campaign Act,” the complaint states.
“Throughout 2024, and in violation of FECA, Senator Sinema appears to have used her principal campaign committee, Sinema for Arizona, to fund her personal travel, including domestic chartered and international flights as well as meals, catering, and lodging related to trips to Europe, Boston, the California wine country, and several other locations, which appear unrelated to any campaign or official business,” the document continues.
Sinema announced March 5 that she would not seek reelection, but since then, “Sinema for Arizona disbursed over one hundred thousand dollars for what appear to be personal travel expenses,” the complaint states. The Arizona Republic reported a figure even higher, $200,000. She had also angered some supporters with lavish travel spending previously.
“The rule of thumb is that any dollar your campaign spends has to be for the campaign — it can’t just be for your own personal benefit,” CREW President Noah Bookbinder said in a written statement to the Republic. “It’s hard to see how any of this spending was for the benefit of the campaign.” Spending from a campaign committee is legal for official business, but Bookbinder said his group did not find that any of it was related to official purposes.
“The law applies to you whether it’s your first week in office or your last,” Bookbinder added. “Spending thousands of dollars of campaign contributions on yourself is even more troubling when it comes after you’ve announced you’re no longer a candidate.”
The Republic sought comment from Sinema’s office but received no response.
