Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

2016 Postmortem

sadbear

(4,340 posts)

2. The filibuster should be political theatre first, procedural second.

Reply to DonViejo (Original post)

Tue Nov 27, 2012, 10:41 AM

Nov 2012

If there is no theatre, as there is now, voters can't see who's holding things up and they're not held accountable.

Even if 60 votes are still required, voters can now see who's to blame for the lack of progress. That is an improvement.

(And if we fuck things up and are put in the minority again, we'll still have it at our disposal, too.)

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

5 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

The false hope of filibuster reform [View all] DonViejo Nov 2012 OP

If a "committed minority" of the Senate is against the proposition of any bill, no_hypocrisy Nov 2012 #1

The filibuster should be political theatre first, procedural second. sadbear Nov 2012 #2

I don't think that's false hope union_maid Nov 2012 #3

I disagree with the original author's argument UCmeNdc Nov 2012 #4

I want the filibuster to survive in some form Proud Liberal Dem Nov 2012 #5