Quote:
|
Originally Posted by miraja2
The filibuster has been around for centuries, and has been used at times throughout the Senate's history (perhaps most famously when southern senators attempted to block the Civil Rights Acts in the 1960s). Basically it is used because of the rule that 60 votes are required for "cloture" which means the end of the debate and the bringing of the bill to the floor for an up and down vote.
It has always been around, but in the last decade both sides have begun to threaten to filibuster seemingly almost anything they disagree with, which means functionally you need 60 votes to get anything passed.
After a thorough debate, I think these people should vote "yes" on the cloture vote regardless of their opinion of the bill. If they disagree with the bill, they can simply register their dissent by voting "no" when the final bill comes up. Prohibiting the bill from even coming to the floor for a vote seems unjust to me.
|
one of my points is that it seems some only have an issue with the filibuster when it hamstrings their side. i don't suppose anyone knows offhand if any worthy bill was held up and never voted on because of the filibuster?
another point is, we are so impatient as a people. why the big hurry to rush to vote? what happened to the benefit of debate, of compromise, of finding a middle ground? perhaps this tactic is in use more these days because the attitudes of both parties has changed-and not necessarily for the better.