Sen. John Cornyn calls on Republicans to change filibuster rules to pass SAVE America Act, reopen DH

[rangerrebew]

 
Sen. John Cornyn calls on Republicans to change filibuster rules to pass SAVE America Act, reopen DHS
By Samuel Chamberlain
Published March 11, 2026
 Updated March 11, 2026, 7:26 a.m. ET
 
Sen. John Cornyn said Wednesday that his fellow Republicans should change the Senate’s filibuster rules to try and force through a voter ID bill that President Trump has called his “number-one priority” heading into the fall midterm elections.

“For many years, I believed that if the US Senate scrapped the filibuster, Texas and our nation would stand to lose more than we would gain,” wrote Cornyn (R-Texas), who is set to face Lone Star State Attorney General Ken Paxton in a hotly contested May 26 primary runoff, in an op-ed published by The Post.

“But when the reality on the ground changes, leaders must take stock and adapt.”
 
Cornyn called for his colleagues to adopt “whatever changes … may prove necessary” to pass legislation meant to secure America’s elections, as well as a separate bill to reopen the Department of Homeland Security.

One suggestion the Texan floated was a so-called “talking filibuster,” in which senators are required to physically hold the floor to prevent votes on legislation.

Currently, most bills are blocked from passage if they fail to gain 60 votes under the so-called “cloture rule.” Under the proposed talking filibuster rule, legislation that is subject to the tactic could clear the Senate with just 51 votes once the floor is yielded.

https://nypost.com/2026/03/11/us-news/sen-john-cornyn-calls-on-republicans-to-change-filibuster-rules-to-pass-save-act/

[rangerrebew]

Has he opened a senate votes for dollars program?

[Cyber Liberty]

If Cornyn is for it, there's a hook in that lure.

[catfish1957]

Changing his vote for SAVE?   

Pandering bastard would sell his mother to keep his senate seat.  I hope DJT double crosses him, and endorses Paxton.

[rustynail]

https://twitter.com/C_3C_3/status/2031565326173786298

[libertybele]

Changing his vote for SAVE?   

Pandering bastard would sell his mother to keep his senate seat.  I hope DJT double crosses him, and endorses Paxton.

I'm surprised that Trump hasn't endorsed Paxton.  To me, he's the best choice by far.

[corbe]

   But I'll endorse you anyway. 

[verga]

 

[mystery-ak]

https://twitter.com/EricLDaugh/status/2032479995239567494

[mystery-ak]

James Woods
@RealJamesWoods
·
1h
People are saying that Vice-President Vance can take over the proceedings next week and therefore could push the SAVE America Act through. If this is true, and I’m not sure it is, it is a watershed moment in his political future. It would show he has the same leadership potential as President Trump. If indeed Vance could do it, but fails to do so, Marco Rubio will be our next president.

[IsailedawayfromFR]

James Woods
@RealJamesWoods
·
1h
People are saying that Vice-President Vance can take over the proceedings next week and therefore could push the SAVE America Act through. If this is true, and I’m not sure it is, it is a watershed moment in his political future. It would show he has the same leadership potential as President Trump. If indeed Vance could do it, but fails to do so, Marco Rubio will be our next president.

JD can.

The VP presides over the Senate, as per the Constitution.

[libertybele]

James Woods
@RealJamesWoods
·
1h
People are saying that Vice-President Vance can take over the proceedings next week and therefore could push the SAVE America Act through. If this is true, and I’m not sure it is, it is a watershed moment in his political future. It would show he has the same leadership potential as President Trump. If indeed Vance could do it, but fails to do so, Marco Rubio will be our next president.

Not so sure about either Vance or Rubio becoming our next president.  If the DEMS take the House and/or Senate the odds of either of them becoming president greatly dwindles.

Secondly, will either of them run?? Vance to my knowledge has not stated he has an interest and Rubio has stated that if Vance decides to run, he won't run. 

[mystery-ak]

https://twitter.com/TheNatPulse/status/2032207506651693506

[Fishrrman]

I like J.D. Vance, but I fail to see what his presence in the Senate can do and what difference he will make.

It will STILL require 51 votes to nuke the filibuster rule, and as I've posted repeatedly in this forum, that is the ONLY way the SAVE Act -- or any other consequential legislation -- is going to be passed in the current Congress.

What procedural rule could Mr. Vance invoke that could change this?

[Cyber Liberty]

I like J.D. Vance, but I fail to see what his presence in the Senate can do and what difference he will make.

It will STILL require 51 votes to nuke the filibuster rule, and as I've posted repeatedly in this forum, that is the ONLY way the SAVE Act -- or any other consequential legislation -- is going to be passed in the current Congress.

What procedural rule could Mr. Vance invoke that could change this?

I don't like the precedent if JD were to take over Thune's position. What if a future VP is a Democrat  and the GOP is in the majority in the Senate?  Could the VP take control of the Senate even if his party is in the minority?

[Bigun]

I don't like the precedent if JD were to take over Thune's position. What if a future VP is a Democrat  and the GOP is in the majority in the Senate?  Could the VP take control of the Senate even if his party is in the minority?

  

[IsailedawayfromFR]

I don't like the precedent if JD were to take over Thune's position. What if a future VP is a Democrat  and the GOP is in the majority in the Senate?  Could the VP take control of the Senate even if his party is in the minority?

Are you saying our Constitution needs revision?

[Cyber Liberty]

Are you saying our Constitution needs revision?

No, I'm saying "Don't push our luck."

[Fishrrman]

ISailed asked (someone else):
"Are you saying our Constitution needs revision?"

Yes, it does.
Extensive revisions.
There are mistakes and oversights in it (things The Founders never could have realized in their time) that are enabling those who are working to destroy the country.

I will go so far to say that the Constitution -- as it stands today -- is provinding the tools and ammunition our enemies will use to destroy and dhimmifi us.

Those omissions, oversights and errors must be fixed.
Because "what we have now" isn't working any more.

Sorry if you don't like this reply.

[IsailedawayfromFR]

ISailed asked (someone else):
"Are you saying our Constitution needs revision?"

Yes, it does.
Extensive revisions.
There are mistakes and oversights in it (things The Founders never could have realized in their time) that are enabling those who are working to destroy the country.

I will go so far to say that the Constitution -- as it stands today -- is provinding the tools and ammunition our enemies will use to destroy and dhimmifi us.

Those omissions, oversights and errors must be fixed.
Because "what we have now" isn't working any more.

Sorry if you don't like this reply.

I agree there are things which could be improved within the Constitution to prevent unscrupulous Congresses or Executive, and especially judges, to corrupt our Republic.

What I was particularly referring to was that the Constitution explicitly gives the power of overseeing the body comprising the states (i.e. - the Senate) to the Vice President.

I am baffled on why the VP does not always run the Senate instead of a so-called majority leader which is extra-constitutional.

The Senate is nothing but a good-old-boys club ever since the 17th Amendment came into being as the power of the states was compromised when their power to select who represents them in the Senate was removed.

I see the VP being a stumbling block to the Senate club.