With all of news lately about the procedures related to filibuster and reconciliation, interested readers may wish to turn to KILL SWITCH by Adam Jentleson. This recent work of non-fiction is subtitled "The Rise of the Modern Senate and the Crippling of American Democracy." Jentleson, former deputy chief of staff to Senator Harry Reid and a political commentator on MSNBC, notes that "the modern Senate guarantees a minority of predominately white conservatives the ability to impose their will." His view is most assuredly biased, but he acknowledges that Republicans and Democrats are to blame for the "grind of relentless gridlock" as the "Senate's minority protections have been inflated into tools of minority domination." In this well-researched and documented text, Jentleson offers suggestions for reform while providing important historical context and background information on the history of the Senate, with quotes ranging from James Madison to James Baldwin. KILL SWITCH received starred reviews from Library Journal and Publishers Weekly.

I had heard about this book for a while before I decided to read it. I heard about it on podcasts, and I read reviews about it, some of which are virtual book reports with which I will not attempt to compete. There was never a question about whether I would read it; it was sitting on my Netgalley shelf waiting for me, but I kept getting pulled in other directions and it always takes a little more effort, for me, to read non-fiction. Once I started reading, though, I couldn’t put this down.

What an incredible undertaking! In my opinion, the Senate is one of the most onerous and boring things I could think about trying to understand more deeply. I see it as a place where ideas go to die, where close-minded, old, white men who crave “the good old days” prevent anything useful that might help the American people to live better lives. I’m not saying my opinion has changed, but at least now I understand it better. That said, I cannot think of anything that I would hate more than being a Senator (not true—I’d really hate cleaning up poop).

I’m not going to summarize all of the things I learned in this book because so many other reviewers do a superior job of that, but the one thing I will say is that I feel some hope after reading this. I truly believe that if any senator with good intentions (and I realize there are many bereft of that) were to read this book, they would be motivated to pursue the changes suggested. The Senate is so far-removed from what the Founders intended for our country, it is virtually unrecognizable. We need to bring it back to what they designed it to do.

I have to add, because I didn’t notice that any other reviewers pointed this out… The acknowledgements are, without a doubt, the most heartfelt and sincere I think I have ever read, with the best saved for last. They touched me and gave me an even greater respect for Adam Jentleson as a human being, and perhaps because of that, it reinforces my belief that he has presented a truly objective overview of what is and what could be. I will be telling everyone I know to read this book.

An excellent tracing of the history of how, in the author's wonderful turn of phrase, "the Senate's minority protections have been inflated into tools of minority domination." There is a ton of good information here, not only about the history of the Senate's filibuster rule but also about why it has been used by the minority party. It's shocking to see how only 41 people have, due to the filibuster, total power to completely shut down all lawmaking and progress. The author has extensive knowledge of the Senate's inner workings due to years as a senior aide.

My one caveat here is that the author doesn't seem to recognize when his arguments don't match the historical record. For example, he claims that the Framers of the Constitution were 100% invested in majority rule, yet neglects to mention that the people eligible to vote as part of this so-called majority were white men with some wealth. Less than 29,000 people voted in the first presidential election; at the time, Virginia alone has 300,000 slaves. The Framers did not care about majority rule, so it's quite hypocritical to claim that the current state of the Senate is against what the Framers wanted. It may be undemocratic, but it was designed that way.

This is a timely, important book about the rise of an obstructionist, minority-rule Senate. Jentleson (former Deputy Chief of Staff to Majority Leader Harry Reid) does an excellent job laying out the Senate's origins as a majoritarian institution and tracing its evolution into its modern form, where a "superminority" can block the priorities of a much larger number of Americans into perpetuity. I knew much of this history in the abstract, but the author does an excellent job of connecting the philosophy and leadership of historical figures (Madison, Calhoun, Russell, Reid, and McConnell, among others) to changes in the institution and ultimately how our country is governed. I learned a number of details with which I was generally unfamiliar.

Modern Republicans come in for more criticism, which is correct and reasonable -- in fact, their approach to governance is much of the problem, and I view many of the Senate's current travails as symptomatic of that broader issue. But I give Jentleson significant credit for acknowledging openly the role that Democrats like Lyndon Johnson and Harry Reid played in centralizing power in the Majority Leader's office. He also effectively debunks that the Senate's current dysfunction is solely because we give small states too much power; instead, the problems are first and foremost the rules and norms of the institution. When norms and practices change, the rules need to as well.

My complaints about this book are minor. It occasionally spends too long on some of the profiles of individuals who shaped the Senate and or lapses into passages that seem mostly focused on settling scores with some of the more obnoxious folks Jentleson crossed paths with on the Hill. (Don't get me wrong, I'm here all day for pointing out how terrible David Vitter is, so I enjoyed it, but these kinds of passages were distractions from the larger, more important themes of the book). The two-part structure worked well, but the chronology of the book could have been a bit tighter, as it unnecessarily dips between past and present in a few places. The solutions section could have used some further elaboration as well, but in many ways, that section is beyond the point: Jentleson is laying out a major problem and how we got there, as well as the principles we must restore if we are to move forward. Getting deeply into the weeds of solutions can be addressed in other venues.

4.5 stars, rounding up for timeliness, clear writing, and producing a book that shouldn't obviously have just been a magazine piece. Thanks to NetGalley for the ARC!