Ending filibuster would backfire

A Tribune letter writer fears there will be a nationwide ban on abortion if Roe v. Wade is overturned (“Abolish the filibuster,” May 9). He is also upset that a national law allowing abortion would not pass because of the filibuster in the Senate.

The Supreme Court, if it follows through as the leaked draft opinion indicates, would only rule that abortion is not a right protected or delineated in the Constitution. The states and federal government can and should decide what they want to do about it.

And it is clear that states will come to different decisions.

The letter writer wants the federal government to just make a law and end the discussion, but too many people have serious problems with abortion to just accept that. So the next best thing is for states to make their own laws, and yes, some will permit it, and others will restrict it.

How else can it be?

The writer pleads for an end to the filibuster. He forgets that Democrats won’t always have a majority in the Senate, if you count the Democratic tiebreaker in Kamala Harris. The Republicans often have the majority, and Democrats are then thankful for the filibuster’s 60-vote threshold.

When our country is so divided, requiring controversial bills 60 votes to pass in the Senate works to the advantage of both parties. You don’t want controversial bills to pass with the slimmest possible majorities. That only magnifies the divide in our country, and you will not like it when it is the other party that passed the bill.

— Larry Craig, Wilmette