Filibuster only serves to stop will of the people

I am writing in regard to the recent Marin Voice commentary by Tom Montgomery, vice chair of the Marin Republicans (“Filibuster is an important tool for minority voices in the Senate,” April 2). I believe he is wrong in defending the Senate filibuster.

Montgomery needs to look at recent history and not ancient Sparta.

Donald Trump lost the election, yet he urged elected officials to overturn it. In this, he was supported by congressional Republicans. Republican-dominated legislatures have passed or are planning to pass legislation aimed at limiting election participation by voters of color.

This anti-democratic behavior should be concerning to all Americans. Instead, Montgomery argues that Senate Republicans, who represent far fewer Americans than Senate Democrats, should hold on to the unreasonable amount of power the filibuster gives them — the power to prevent most legislation passing with a simple majority vote.

I consider this position to be profoundly anti-democratic.

No Republican senators support the proposed For the People Act, which protects voting rights. The majority of Americans, however, do support the bill. It should be easier, not harder, to vote. Montgomery, like all Californians, enjoys the benefits of “no excuse” absentee voting. Why shouldn’t all Americans?

Why should Republican senators be allowed to stop national voting reforms, or other measures supported by the majority, like gun safety measures, from passing? How does this serve democracy?

— Ruth Dell, Tiburon