Nuclear Option Coming?

deaddude said:
What I don't understand is why filibustering would be a bad thing. Comprimise is good. This filibuster thing alows a minority to retain the ability to force comprimise even if the opposing party controls both the legislative and executive branches.


Thus causing people such as Sen. McCain to say such things as the Rs will need it in the future and it would be a mistake to change the rule.
 
deaddude said:
What I don't understand is why filibustering would be a bad thing. Comprimise is good. This filibuster thing alows a minority to retain the ability to force comprimise even if the opposing party controls both the legislative and executive branches.

Because then the minority would rule. Our Constitution is set up so that the majority rules in the Senate. (with exceptions where it requires two-thirds)

Filibustering judicial appointees is only a privilege due to an in-Senate-rule. Senate rules can and do get changed periodically. When a minority abuses the filibustering privileges by trying to block a dozen qualified judges nominated by the President as per the Constitution, they get to lose their privileges to filibuster unless they are going to allow for an up or down vote. Filibustering forever (in this case, hanging up judges for years - since Bush was elected in 2000) is a selfish partisan manuever to get around Constitutional majority rule in the Senate and is clearly blocking the legitimate and Constitutional business of the Senate.
 

New Topics

Forum List

Back
Top