Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsDemocratic Solution to the Filibuster: Make Them Talk
WASHINGTON -- The next time a minority of senators find something the majority supports to be objectionable, they may be required to take the Senate floor and explain just why they object. And when they're done with that, they'll have to keep talking, and talking, and talking.
The most persistent advice that Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) said he gets from liberals he meets across the country is as simple as it is frustrating: "Make them actually filibuster!"
The most persistent advice that Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) said he gets from liberals he meets across the country is as simple as it is frustrating: "Make them actually filibuster!"
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/11/15/democrats-filibuster-reform_n_2141382.html?utm_hp_ref=politics
I have been saying this for a while. Filibusters were designed to be a last resort, and should be reserved for occasions when a senator has such strong convictions that they are willing to talk until they collapse with no bathroom breaks.
The Senate changed the rules in the 1970's because talk-to-death filibusters were taking up too much time. But the unintended consequence was to make it so easy to filibuster that almost everything is now subject to one.
17 votes, 0 passes | Time left: Unlimited | |
End the filibuster completely | |
1 (6%) |
|
Change the rules back to require senators to actually talk a bill to death | |
16 (94%) |
|
Keep the no-talk filibuster but lower the cloture number to 55 | |
0 (0%) |
|
Keep the filibuster as is - we may be back in the minority someday | |
0 (0%) |
|
0 DU members did not wish to select any of the options provided. | |
Show usernames
Disclaimer: This is an Internet poll |
6 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies

Democratic Solution to the Filibuster: Make Them Talk (Original Post)
democrattotheend
Nov 2012
OP
"The Senate changed the rule in the 1970's because talk-to-death filibusters were taking up too much
ToxMarz
Nov 2012
#1
The filibuster was a unintended consequence of simplifying the rules in the first place.
Vincardog
Nov 2012
#3
ToxMarz
(2,256 posts)1. "The Senate changed the rule in the 1970's because talk-to-death filibusters were taking up too much
time." So they got nothing done? Well now they are just able to get a lot more nothing done.
Binders Keepers
(369 posts)2. I've been wondering for the past 4 years why Dem's didn't require this.
Make the Repug's pay the price, in terms of expenditure of hot air and exhaustion of the public's patience. When the public sees them talking nonstop over the next year to hold up any and all bills, it will turn them out of office in droves.
Vincardog
(20,234 posts)3. The filibuster was a unintended consequence of simplifying the rules in the first place.
It was never a legitimate device in the democratic process.
HopeHoops
(47,675 posts)4. That's what I'VE been saying all along - No threat - DO IT, DAMN IT!
gravity
(4,157 posts)5. The Republicans would love to talk and talk all day about their positions.
Be careful what you wish for.
democrattotheend
(12,011 posts)6. As if they don't already?
But this way they would have to endure the physical discomfort (not to mention potential negative publicity) of filibustering if they want to stop something badly enough.