Blog

Flaming Pissed and Ready to Fight

Start the Talking Filibuster on the SAVE America Act or Lose the Midterms

Just a couple of Johns.

That was my post yesterday, and nothing since has changed my mind. David Marcus gets the pulse of the street better than most. In his Fox News column, “Passing the Save America Act to save Cornyn is a fair deal,” he reports what House Republicans are hearing back home: no good answers for furious voters. He quotes a guy in El Paso who cut straight to it: “If they can’t pass things that 80% of us want, then what is the point of all this?”

Marcus is right about the national mood. From Plano, Texas, I see something even clearer—the gulf between the Republican base and the Establishment has rarely been this wide. I’ve watched the old networks here for years: donors, lobbyists, consultants who think “regular order” is more important than winning fights that matter. Cornyn barely scraped 40% in the primary. Sixty percent of Texas GOP voters looked at him and said no. Ken Paxton’s offer is as elegant as it gets: pass the full SAVE America Act and I drop out of the runoff. That’s leverage. That’s Texas telling the Senate: do your damn job or we’ll replace you.

The stakes couldn’t be plainer. If the Senate keeps slow-walking the one reform voters demanded louder than anything else—only American citizens decide American elections—enthusiasm collapses. Independents smell weakness. Democrats turn every delay into proof we’re unserious. We lose the House. We lose the Senate. Midterms 2026 become a bloodbath because leadership chose comfort over courage.

The SAVE America Act is straightforward. The House passed it February 11, 218-213. It requires documentary proof of U.S. citizenship—passport, birth certificate, the real stuff—to register to vote in federal elections. No more leaning on a driver’s license that doesn’t prove you’re a citizen. Photo ID at the polls. States use the Department of Homeland Security’s SAVE system to purge non-citizens from voter rolls. It closes mail-in loopholes that invite fraud while fully protecting military and absentee voting. Common sense. Overwhelmingly popular. President Trump drew the line this weekend: “It supersedes everything else. MUST GO TO THE FRONT OF THE LINE.” He won’t sign another bill until the unwatered-down version hits his desk.

Enter John Thune. He’s out there saying a talking filibuster is impossible. He’s “studied it thoroughly.” It’s “way more complicated and risky than people realize.” No piece of legislation in history has passed that way. The conference isn’t unified. Quorum problems. Amendment chaos. Other priorities become impossible “once you’re in the throes.”

This is gaslighting, plain and simple. Thune has been in the Senate more than 20 years. He knows exactly what happened starting March 26, 1964. Southern Democrats launched a talking filibuster against the Civil Rights Act that lasted 57 working days. They read phone books, recited recipes, talked until they couldn’t stand. The majority didn’t fold. Public pressure built. Cloture passed 71-29 on June 10. The bill cleared the Senate 73-27 nine days later and was signed July 2.

That bill scraped by with narrow majority support—Gallup in the fall of 1964 showed 58–59% approval of the new law. Harris had it just over 50% in August with high uncertainty and deep Southern opposition. Polarized. Contentious. Yet leaders forced the fight into daylight and won.

Compare that to SAVE America today. Harvard/Harris in February: 71% overall support. Ninety-one percent of Republicans, 69% of independents, even 50% of Democrats. Voter ID? Eighty-one percent. Proof of citizenship to register? Seventy-five percent. Purge non-citizens from rolls? Eighty percent. Only citizens should vote? Eighty-five percent. This isn’t a narrow majority. It’s a supermajority lay-up.

Modern senators have grown lazy in the comfort of the zombie filibuster—one objection, 60 votes required, no one has to stand up and defend anything in public. A real talking filibuster flips the script. Democrats would have to hold the floor, day after day, explaining why they oppose a reform more popular now than the Civil Rights Act was then.

This is the Civil Rights Act of our era. Protecting the franchise of American citizens is sacred. Very few things are more fundamental to the Republic. After open borders, record illegal crossings, and years of gaslighting that “non-citizen voting isn’t happening,” the base isn’t asking for permission. They’re demanding proof that citizenship still means something at the ballot box.

Here in Texas the Establishment-base divide feels personal. Paxton’s deal could save Cornyn’s seat and deliver the mandate. Cornyn’s suddenly open to a talking filibuster under primary pressure. But Thune clings to excuses. The old power structure wants calm. The base wants a fight.

So let’s give them one.

Start the talking filibuster on March 26, 2026—the anniversary of the 1964 Civil Rights filibuster. I’m completely fine with taking 75 days to get it done. Hold the floor. Make Democrats own their opposition in real time. Force the country to watch. Cloture by early June, passage shortly after.

Then President Trump signs it on July 4, 2026—America’s 250th birthday, exactly one year after he signed the One Big Beautiful Bill Act on July 4, 2025. Economic freedom last Independence Day; electoral integrity this one. SAVE America becomes the capstone of the semiquincentennial—securing citizen self-government for the next 250 years. That kind of symbolism doesn’t just pass a bill. It rallies the base, inspires the country, and locks in Republican majorities.

Leader Thune, Senator Cornyn: the House did its job. The President drew the line. The base is watching—and we’re furious. Forge the unity. Embrace the fight. Seventy-five days if that’s what it takes. Pass the full SAVE America Act.

Do it, and we keep the majorities with momentum heading into 2026. Fail, and start drafting concession speeches now.

The choice is yours. The franchise—and the future—are ours.

Like this post? Become a Citizen Producer!

James K. Bishop

James K. Bishop is a conservative writer and raconteur hailing from Texas, known for his incisive and often provocative takes on political and cultural issues. With a staunch commitment to originalist constitutional principles, he emphasizes limited government, individual liberties, and traditional American values. Active on X under the handle @James_K_Bishop, he frequently engages his audience with sharp critiques of progressive policies, media narratives, and overreaches by the federal government. His style is direct, often laced with humor and wit, which resonates strongly with his conservative followers.