Is anyone here still in favor of retaining the filibuster?

[backscatter712]

Because quite frankly, the filibuster has shown its true colors, as the front-line weapon to thwart democracy and impose tyranny of the minority.

I'm sure some people here will say that the filibuster could technically be used for good - to block insane right-wing raving lunatics from being confirmed when Bushies are in power... Yeah, when we tried, where'd that get us? The nuclear option. Where were the filibusters for FISA? the PATRIOT Act? The Iraq War Resolution? Alito? Roberts? Oh yeah, the same conservadems who are gleefully joining the Rethugs in thwarting the people's will today were breaking filibusters back then.

The point is that the filibuster has historically been a great tool for thwarting democracy, and a lousy tool for protecting democracy when the right-wingers are passing legislation to undermine it.

It's more trouble than it's worth and has got to go.

What say you?

[ixion]

1. the tyranny of the minority?

oh, please. :eyes:

[backscatter712]

4. What else do you call what we're seeing in the Senate?

60-80% of the public consistently support the public option, and 56 senators out of 100 support it, but are thwarted by a minority.

That is fucking tyranny.

[Posteritatis]

11. And when the numbers change in a future election people here will be crying for that to happen.

I love how everyone gets all hyperbolic and authoritarian the moment they're represented by the party in power instead of the other guy.

[provis99]

6. hey moron, the whole point of the filibuster was anti-democratic.

Read a political book, fer chrissakes, or shut the hell up.

[ixion]

9. hey

bite me.

You people who are afraid of a minority are pathetic. You have to cheat so you can feel like you're winning. Very sad.

Changing the rules of the game in the middle of the game is called cheating. It's what the GOP does, and I would expect more from the Dems.

I'm happy you are not one of the Dem leadership.

[backscatter712]

20. The filibuster itself is a type of cheating.

The rules of debate were originally put in place so all sides of an issue could have a chance to speak out on a bill.

Then the rules of debate were abused so as to block legislation that a majority favors. From the beginning, the filibuster was a way to game the system.

The rules are broken. It's time to fix them.

[ixion]

21. nope... in our system of checks and balances, it's a check

against the majority, and in that it is valuable, despite the abuse that may occur.

[imdjh]

2. Arrest the corporate puppets and drag them through the streets.

[baldguy]

3. Keep it - but MAKE THEM stand up & talk all night.

[burning rain]

5. Get rid of it.

While Grayson's proposal of 55 votes for cloture would be an improvement, I'd rather see it be a matter of simple majority vote. The electoral college and equal representation for all states in the Senate, regardless of population, should be enough to satisfy people who dislike democracy, without having the filibuster in addition.

[orwell]

7. How can I support the fillibuster...

...when I don't even support the notion of "the Senate."

The Senate seems to be constructed to do two things. It gives undo power to small, low population states and rich white men.

There are three things I would do if I was a dictator.

Change the current campaign finance system to public financing.

Abolish the Senate.

Abolish political parties.

None of the three will ever happen.

[backscatter712]

8. Good point. The Senate is our House of Lords.

The UK got sick of that shit and stripped most of their power from them. Now, they can debate laws, and at worst, delay them, but they cannot block laws passed by the House of Commons.

So should it be with the Senate. All real political power needs to go to the House of Representatives, and the Senate should be relegated to ceremonial duties.

[Kaleva]

10. The difference is that members of the Senate are elected by the people.

The members of the House of Lords are selected.

[WhaTHellsgoingonhere]

12. Waiting for the "Abolish the Senate" poll

[whistler162]

14. That is in the same poll as abolish the US!

[WhaTHellsgoingonhere]

15. Hardly, holmes...

...we don't need a check against the check-and-balance already in place in the form of the House, which is a far more representative body of the people than the Senate.

Flush the Senate

[whistler162]

16. Actually I am serious....

flush the Senate and you can flush the US down the drain!

Okay you don't like the US we get it.

[WhaTHellsgoingonhere]

17. If constitutional amendments are considered anti-American...

...so be it.

[backscatter712]

18. Works for me.

Like I said, do the same thing to the Senate that the UK did to the House of Lords - strip it of power and leave it doing little more than ceremonial duties.

Either that, or restructure it. Create Senate Districts with equal population, and elect senators that way, so Wyoming residents don't get more influence than California residents.

[whistler162]

13. Yup... lets remove the fillibuster so that when

Republicans or what ever party other than the Democrats has power they can push whatever bill meets their fancy through!

Now getting rid of the current rules about fillibusters and bringing back the old 1 person standing for hours talking about anything to block the bill - YES!

[backscatter712]

19. It's not as if the Republicans don't already push whatever they want through when they're in power.

Where was the filibuster of FISA? The PATRIOT Act? The Iraq War Resolution? All those Iraq War funding bills?

Like I said, the filibuster is a lousy tool for protection of democracy, and a powerful tool for repression of democracy.

[ixion]

22. No, it's a valuable tool that the Dems are inept at both using and countering

apparently.

And the Dems were more than happy to push FISA and the unPATRIOTic Act and the MCA and the rest of that stuff. It's sad.

[ManiacJoe]

23. Keep it, but is has to be real.

None of this declare it then move on to other business. If no one is actually talking on the floor, the filibuster is over and it is time for a vote on the issue at hand.