Should filibusters be eliminated?

3 Comments

  • bob - 14 years ago

    1) every federal employee, including congress, shall be under every law that applies to the american public.

    2) term limits for every member of congress.

  • Richard Allbritton - 14 years ago

    Our Country faces serious challenges. We no longer can afford for our U.S. Senators to act like aristocrats.

    Reform the Senate: Get rid of the filibuster altogether. End the practice of a single Senator holding up anything.

    I have sent this message this message to each of my U.S. Senators. I invite each of you to send a similar message to your Senators. ~ richard allbritton, Miami

  • Lee in FL - 14 years ago

    There may well be reason to filibuster some legislation. But it should be very rare.

    Confirmations should not be filibustered. Too many government positions sit open -- and idle -- because the nominee's confirmation takes too long to get through the Senate. Far fewer positions should require Senate approval. But those which do should not be subject to holds or filibusters. Surely a staffer can find out all that is necessary in the lead-up to the hearing.

    There should be a cap on the number of filibusters allowed for each congress. And it should be at about 1/4 the number now taking place. Also, there should be a procedural vote early in considertion of a bill, either allowing or forbidding a filibuster of that bill, not these repeated votes needing 60 ayes related to the same bill. This past week with poor Sen Byrd repeatedly being wheeled in and out of the Senate Chamber was farcical.

    It amazes may how much has been accomplished this year in spite of the filibuster, far more than any other first year of a presidency in a long, long time, thanks to the delaying tactics which create gridlock. Who can blame the average citizen who has little knowledge of Senate rules for being disgusted?

Leave a Comment

0/4000 chars


Submit Comment