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

brush

(61,033 posts)

12. We need to get rid of it as soon as we can. It's a relic of slavery just like the EC.

Reply to Atticus (Original post)

Sat Jan 23, 2021, 03:06 PM

Jan 2021

It's not in the Constitution. Racist senator John C. Calhoun was the driver behind it back in the 1800s as it benefited the southern states.

Now it's just tradition and there is no reason that the Senate can't have a simple majority to pass bills.

Get rid of it.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

27 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Serious question: What is the argument against killing the filibuster? nt [View all] Atticus Jan 2021 OP

We might need it later? (nt) mr_lebowski Jan 2021 #1

Couldn't the same be said about machine guns? If we could trust everyone to be as patriotic, Atticus Jan 2021 #5

Our supply of dry powder MUST be protected, even at the cost of... ret5hd Jan 2021 #2

so we let the enemy use KatyMan Jan 2021 #25

i think there is no good argument. only tradition. bullimiami Jan 2021 #3

Far from. It's a double-edged sword on an uncontrollable handle. Hortensis Jan 2021 #15

Far from. It's a double-edged sword on an uncontrollable handle. Hortensis Jan 2021 #20

Republicans Might Win the Senate in the Future? TuskMoar Jan 2021 #4

For me, it's that as soon as Democrats do it, they have to be OnDoutside Jan 2021 #6

As Myron Cohen might have said: "Well! If you're going to throw LOGIC at me------!" Atticus Jan 2021 #7

I agree. Lose the filibuster and then go big. Dream Girl Jan 2021 #11

Yes, you'd only get one shot at it, so if they're not prepared for that OnDoutside Jan 2021 #17

I agree with this, and I'm not sure it can be done piecemeal.. Volaris Jan 2021 #16

It is all connected, yes, and I would be surprised if any of that OnDoutside Jan 2021 #19

Agree on all that. But just because were doing that first, doesnt mean ignoring Volaris Jan 2021 #21

100% agree. My only concern is that they choose wisely which to OnDoutside Jan 2021 #23

In all fairness to the counter-argument, I'm actually happy just now about Volaris Jan 2021 #26

Yes, I made that exact point at time Manchin came out and said OnDoutside Jan 2021 #27

OnDout, with a one-vote majority and a number of Democratic senators Hortensis Jan 2021 #22

100% agree, I was just saying that if they were to go that route, they OnDoutside Jan 2021 #24

It allows Senators to vote for what their constituents want but what their big donors oppose jalan48 Jan 2021 #8

But, doesn't that kind of childish cowardice make most people want to blow chunks? nt Atticus Jan 2021 #9

Yes, but it allows the Senator the opportunity to look like he/she is doing the right thing. jalan48 Jan 2021 #10

We need to get rid of it as soon as we can. It's a relic of slavery just like the EC. brush Jan 2021 #12

We agree. I just wondered if I had overlooked something that makes sense. So far, "No". nt Atticus Jan 2021 #13

The filibuster is a quick&dirty incomplete fix for an inherently defective electoral system. DetlefK Jan 2021 #14

The Senators would actually have to speak on the floor... joshcryer Jan 2021 #18