This conversation is closed. Start a new conversation
or join one »
Killing the filibuster in Congress
After the election Senator Reid stated that he will sponsor a change to the rules which would essentially kill the filibuster. In 1975 the democrats changed the rules from a 2 thirds to a 3 fifths for override and the verbage changed to read from those present and voting to those duly chosen and sworn. Reid tried this a couple of years ago and his own party shot it down. This may not seem like a big thing but it is the only voice the minority in congress has.
In my opinion this would stop any hope of congress working together and members of the minority would be without vote or voice and may as well not attend.
Filibusters are seldom used and the very threat of a filibuster bring on a vote for cloture.
It could be seen that Senator Reid has said we do not want to work things out and we will be able to force our views without decent. Has a Politburo ring to it. The administration would no longer have to go around congress to implement stainability and cap and trade acts.
The voice of nealy half of the US would be silenced.
What is you opinion. Should the filibuster be killed?
Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.
Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.
pat gilbert 50+
Reading a little about it and the fact that Harry Reid is for it means I'm probably against it.
Wilson (the devil incarnate) persuaded senators to be able to end the filibuster by a cloture vote.
The fact that this country desperately needs gridlock in the legislature.
Hasn't enough been changed in the last 4 years?
John Smith 30+
It's been used 224 times during Obama's first term...
Harry Reid's plan is not entirely democrat-centered, after all, if the republicans regain the senate in the future (which might happen in as little as two years from now) they will profit from Reid's weakening of the filibuster.
Comment deleted
Gail . 50+
pat gilbert 50+
Linda Taylor 50+