Can we talk about filibustering for a sec?

I have thoughts on the topic, but I would love to hear from others. I want to understand why it is used, and since I can’t come up with any logical reasons myself, I’m hoping someone out there can enlighten me.

My thoughts: It’s utterly ridiculous and should not exist. It is the ENTIRE job of these people to make changes-improvements, ostensibly- to our community. We elect them ENTIRELY based on their ability to choose the best course of action, and to work with (WITH!) one another to move toward that action.

Ha! Obviously, this isn’t the way things actually pan out right now, but I believe that things should at least be set up with these ideals in mind. If not, then what the heck are we even doing?

SO. Why would we allow them to avoid doing their jobs by talking about nothing? I mean, that is literally what it is. As in, “Hey Doctor, we’re ready for you to scrub in and start this heart transplant now.” “Hold your horses Nurse, let me spend the next 8 hours explaining why The Hunger Games is better than Harry Potter instead.” In no other situation would this be acceptable or even remotely non-comical.

I do know that people argue that everyone’s against filibustering until it’s a bill that THEY vehemently oppose on the docket. Then they’re all, “We will do ANYTHING to stop this from happening.” And yes, I can imagine feeling that way. But I don’t care. Hey, if I could avoid getting a parking ticket by describing each item in my closet down to button count and zipper length, that’d be cool. But that’s not how the world works. I realize that comparing these potentially life-changing pieces of legislature to paying a ticket is not quite commensurate, but the point is that it should simply not be an option. No matter how much we want to get our way, we cannot allow such an inane way of getting it. Right? Right??

Please, tell me what I’m missing.




One thought on “Filibustupid

  1. Filibuster is an intentional tool designed to prevent a sizeable but not overwhelming majority from overriding the desires of a substantial minority. Any filibuster can be stopped if the majority is large enough to martial the two thirds vote needed to cut it off. Or something like that.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s