The wrong approach to filibuster reform

  • Article by: EDITORIAL , Washington Post
  • Updated: December 4, 2012 - 12:39 PM

When it comes to the filibuster, consistency has never been either party's strong point.

  • 5
  • Comments

  • Results per page:
  • 1 - 5 of 5
chuckdancerDec. 4, 1212:52 PM

The filibuster needs to be returned to being a filibuster and not an automatic obstruction of the entire process. If some senator feels so strongly about an issue that it must be stopped and can only do it with a filibuster then let that senator get up on the floor and filibuster away. Everyone can see who is objecting and the rationale can be laid out for all to consider. Enough of this blanket obstruction by anonymous power brokers that hold the entire country hostage. We don't hear the chants of "up or down vote" anymore from the confederates like we used to hear so often. That should be all we need to know about this.

20
0
muggsh2oDec. 4, 12 2:42 PM

We need to change Washington. Can any of you partisan hacks object to that statement? How do we do it? We have no say whatsoever with our congressional members or president, so how do we do it? Here's an idea. Stop voting for incumbents if they do not represent us fully. Put your partisan garbage aside and each election, objectively review the senator, president or representative and if they have not done anything good for our districts, state, and/or country, vote them out. Once that happens for two decades or so, these jokers will realize they aren't invincible. But until goofball voters don't recognize that these 2 parties are basically the same and stick with the partisan garbage that has not advanced our great country anywhere, Washington & St. Paul will not change. Hope & Change - FORWARD!

5
6
sek2undrstndDec. 4, 12 5:23 PM

First off, Bush II had 81.3% of his judicial nominees confirmed. President Obama has had 42% confirmed. The filibuster is important to protect the minority but the minority party also needs to use restrain when they use it. And the silent holds need to be done away with no matter what. If someone wants to filibuster, let them stand up on the Senate floor and filibuster the old fashioned way, by talking ad nauseum.

10
0
cstoney48Dec. 4, 12 6:03 PM

The Founders were very specific about which items required a super majority. For those who claim fealty to 'original intent', the filibuster is an unconstitutional usurpation of power and should be negated as such. The Articles of Confederation were abandoned because of the inability of Congress to make decisions. With their abuse of Rule 22 and other obstructionist practices, the Senate has recreated the impotency of the Articles. The filibuster has rendered the decision making ability of the Senate an absurdity. The founders wanted to cool the tea--not freeze it.

7
1
allhailfsmDec. 5, 1212:56 PM

The GOP has a demonstrated willingness to use tactics that have never been used before to get their way. Holding up all legislation, blocking Democrats from testifying to committees and willingly spreading disinformation if they think it helps their purpose.

Dems need to fight back on day one, and not expect the tiger to change its stripes.

0
0
  • 1 - 5 of 5

Comment on this story   |  

ADVERTISEMENT

  • about opinion

  • The Opinion section is produced by the Editorial Department to foster discussion about key issues. The Editorial Board represents the institutional voice of the Star Tribune and operates independently of the newsroom.

  • Submit a letter or commentary
Connect with twitterConnect with facebookConnect with Google+Connect with PinterestConnect with PinterestConnect with RssfeedConnect with email newsletters

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT