My last point on the filibuster fray

It seems that the Senate showdown over changing the filibuster rules as they pertain to judicial nominations is nearing. Much of this also seems to just be hype to polarize people, but it may come to the "nuclear" rule change option.

There are now PACs organizing on both sides of this issue, TV commercials galore, so on.

This really is a trivial issue and doesnt take much to understand and comprehend. Both major political parties in the US have at one time or another been the majority in the Senate and both have been upset with the other minority party over filibusters. BOTH PARTIES have at one time or another recommended changing the rules to remove the filibuster, but BOTH PARTIES are incorrect and ignornant to want to do this.

Fact, the filibuster can be overruled with present rules via a 3/5 vote called "cloture". That means simply 60 Senators can override even a filibuster (it used to be 2/3, that was changed in 1975).

Fact, the filibuster is allowed in the Senate, based on Senate rules, so that debate can continue as long as a Senator wishes. (Unless overriden via cloture.)

Fact, the POINT of the SENATE is that each state is represented equally and that a minority can matter and must be considered. It is a different body than the House, BY DESIGN. The Senate is SUPPOSED to be able to be affected by a minority, it is the very body of our government where the minority has a voice and that voice is supposed to be considered.

To change the filibuster rules (again, either party) would remove this minority consideration and effectively render the Senate itself much less effective as a legislative body by making it merely a potential rubber stamp of whatever the majority party happened to be.

The minority consideration was the original intention of the Senate (and sure as hell makes sense to present day), those that do not understand that and condone or further push for the change of the filibuster rules are ignorant of the very tenets of the government of the United States.

(And for the record, government is better when one party does NOT have total control and a "simple majority" does not constitute total power to do whatever that majority party desires. Consideration and cooperation with a minority party or parties is essential.)

  Filibuster and Cloture

Comments

RE: My last point on the filibuster fray

As of July 1, Dubbya's favourite little Deputy Sherriff (John Howard, Prime Minister of Australia) will have a majority in both houses of parliament. Suddenly all those things that we have so far avoided losing to The American Way will be lost.... (media monopoly laws, universal free healthcare, cheap tertiary education, unfair dismissal laws, workers rights to a minimum wage etc etc).

Can we request an American invasion to kick this undemocratic government out?

RE: My last point on the filibuster fray

@Can we request an American invasion to kick this undemocratic government out?

You mean the pretend American government that fights for "freedom and democracy" around the world by invading sovereign nations? We can only call in an invasion if there is clear and present danger, an imminent threat and so on.

Based on the evidence given by Powell at the UN to justify the Iraq mess maybe you could get some "trucks" and some "radios", that seemed to be enough "evidence" for the invasion of Iraq (well that and clear and present petroleum).

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.