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

JDPriestly

(57,936 posts)
18. No. To move Congress, we have to make sure that
Fri Nov 16, 2012, 11:26 AM
Nov 2012

members of Congress are held responsible to the public for their negative, delaying filibuster.

Requiring filibustering senators to stand up and talk until they can't talk any more, to require them to explain their opposition to the laws that are supported by the majority would help speed up the processes in Congress.

It also might help insure that members of Congress are really physically and mentally fit to serve. I remember back when the filibuster meant that people stayed up and talked on the floor of the Senate all night. The filibustering senators had to invest some energy in time in doing that and were much more inclined to compromise.

I support returning to the full filibuster. It would actually improve representation in Congress because constituents would have a chance to judge for themselves whether their senators were just being obstructive as a sort of gamesmanship or whether the issues they were debating were really worth the trouble.

Remember, we pay these obstructionist senators not only to just do nothing themselves at times on important matters but to force the rest of the Senate to stop their work on certain bills. Sometimes the filibusters really are necessary. But most of the time the Senators of the Party of No idly gain their paychecks. One thing we would all agree on: Democrats and Republicans work hard to earn the money that they pay in taxes. In the real world, our bosses make sure we work hard. We forget this, but we are the bosses of our Senators. We might as well make them work, visibly work, as hard as all those Walmart and other employees of big, greedy companies do.

I'm for the spoken, standing, suffering filibuster. Make the obstructionists earn their money. They are wasting ours with their negativity. And sometimes the public learns something from the filibustering folks. I wish someone had filibustered the resolution that permitted us to get into the Iraq War.

Recommendations

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

How about just abolish the whole thing. Warren Stupidity Nov 2012 #1
yes. ladjf Nov 2012 #2
This is a good compromise. cyclezealot Nov 2012 #9
No. To move Congress, we have to make sure that JDPriestly Nov 2012 #18
No. The filibuster does protect the voice of the minority. Yes it's been abused HereSince1628 Nov 2012 #23
"the guarantee that a minority as small as 1 senator can plead a case" Warren Stupidity Nov 2012 #24
Well, that's the current circumstance yes. And yes, there is no doubt it is a tool to delay. HereSince1628 Nov 2012 #26
It isn't the last four years, it is the last 100 years. Warren Stupidity Nov 2012 #29
It's sort of difficult to look at this graph and not see an increased use of filibuster HereSince1628 Nov 2012 #34
I did not claim that we aren't in a filibuster storm. Warren Stupidity Nov 2012 #36
If they eliminated the rule that allows them to merely declare a filibuster without actually having Egalitarian Thug Nov 2012 #27
The Republicans has been abusing the system for 35 years. Panasonic Nov 2012 #32
That's easy to say when we are in power DefenseLawyer Nov 2012 #28
Yup, that is the downside. Warren Stupidity Nov 2012 #30
Then the Republican minority continues to become a super-minority Panasonic Nov 2012 #31
I'm happy he can admit he was wrong CanonRay Nov 2012 #3
Good! City Lights Nov 2012 #4
That's right... loyalsister Nov 2012 #35
Bout time... ProudProgressiveNow Nov 2012 #5
This makes me very optimistic for our future. OnionPatch Nov 2012 #6
Make them actually filibuster. patrice Nov 2012 #7
At the risk of sounding unkind... duh. phantom power Nov 2012 #8
I was watching a documentary on LBJ last night ( A must see BTW) on Netflix srican69 Nov 2012 #10
But that was an extremely rare event Kaleva Nov 2012 #15
Don't we need Senator Sanders to filibuster... SHRED Nov 2012 #11
The thought of Senator Sanders filibustering makes me very happy. JDPriestly Nov 2012 #19
Can't happen: cloture vote would have the required 60 votes. Warren Stupidity Nov 2012 #25
Use McCain's craptastic threat to filibuster a Rice nomination as the perfect excuse RomneyLies Nov 2012 #12
I would only suggest sulphurdunn Nov 2012 #13
Reduce the number of votes needed to overcome the fuckybuster from 60 to 53. librechik Nov 2012 #14
Been sayin' that for years and years... PoliticalBiker Nov 2012 #16
Mr Reid, my suggestions for the opposing party filibustering are as follows: MyOpinion-2 Nov 2012 #17
I will believe it when I see it. I think the good Senator has acted tough before with rhett o rick Nov 2012 #20
One potential BIG problem with this reform: QUORUM CALLS could keep way more ProgressiveEconomist Nov 2012 #21
Reference on quorum calls during filibusters: a 2011 CRS paper st senate.gov: ProgressiveEconomist Nov 2012 #22
Time to go nuclear on them. Panasonic Nov 2012 #33
Someone please explain this to me Courtesy Flush Nov 2012 #37
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Democratic Solution To Th...»Reply #18