Our Senate doesn’t talk much anymore. The talking filibuster, in which each member is able to speak for as long as he or she is physically able, without rest or food, has become a ghost of the past, its death brought about by the current practice of only bringing bills to the Senate floor when they are already guaranteed enough votes to pass.

The talking filibuster has died quietly, and with it the former glory of senators waxing eloquent for hours, fighting for what they believe in.

Most of us have seen the movie “Mr. Smith Goes to Washington.” We watched riveted as the junior senator filibustered adamantly for hours and hours, no matter the cost physically, mentally, and emotionally. And yet in the end, his herculean effort, his willingness to sacrifice publicly for what he believed in, was the key to unlocking his success; for as the film closes, he claims victory through the sheer willingness to give so much for what is most important.

This was just a movie (and a wonderful one), but in real life, the talking filibuster also has a dramatic past. It is derived from the Spanish word “filibustero,” meaning “plunderer” or “pirate.” The term first appeared in the 1850s, a slur against senators who were “stealing” the Senate’s time by using lengthy speeches to delay legislation. Real swashbucklers, but in suits and ties, whose swords were their speeches.

From its first use in 1789 in debate over where the new nation’s capital should be (in which Pennsylvania Sen. William Maclay wrote in his diary that the “design of the Virginians … was to talk away the time, so that we could not get the bill passed”) to the months-long struggle against the Civil Rights Act of 1964 led by the Southern Democrats, the filibuster has proved itself to be a pillar of the Senate’s greatness, for one major reason: It forces the senators to actually fight for what they believe in.

After the civil rights filibuster era, the Senate quietly decided it did not want to work so hard or debate so publicly. They lowered the cloture threshold (cloture being just a fancy word for consensus needed for a bill to pass) to 60 votes in 1975 and then subsequently gutted it even further by allowing the Senate to work on other business while a filibuster nominally proceeded, meaning senators no longer had to be present on the floor – they just had to threaten to be. Basically, if a bill wasn’t guaranteed 60 votes, it would be dead on arrival. This is still the case.

The American people pay the salaries of senators. We elect them to debate ideas, to advance the ideals that we stand for. As recently cited by the president in the State of the Union Address, support for the policies in the SAVE America Act is in the 80th percentile, spanning political parties and demographics.

The bill includes three things: requiring photo ID to vote, ensuring that only American citizens vote in American elections, and improving the accuracy of voter rolls. These policies are common-sense and overwhelmingly popular. And yet, the Senate has not moved the bill, even as the pressure and calls for a talking filibuster, which is the only viable mechanism to get the SAVE America Act through the Senate at this point, have drastically increased in the past few days.

The American people want to watch the SAVE America Act play out publicly, on the floor of the Senate, in front of the cameras and millions of eyes. It is this important. Bring back the duties of senators to debate. Bring back substance over soundbites. Bring back the life, vigor, and drama of the Senate.

Make them try to take the ship.

Make the Senate Talk Again.