I agree ban the holds, cut out that stupid one person objection rule that Tuberville used and forget the 41 opponents on the floor at all times. Ban that damned filibuster. It promotes the tyranny of the majority. This is not the 1700's.
I agree ban the holds, cut out that stupid one person objection rule that Tuberville used and forget the 41 opponents on the floor at all times. Ban that damned filibuster. It promotes the tyranny of the majority. This is not the 1700's.
Oh, I agree the world would be a better place without the filibuster entirely - it is not constitutional and functions to empower the tyranny of the minority - but the Senate loves its toys and probably would not vote to ban the filibuster entirely. Since so many senators are "getting up there" in age, it would be fun to see how well they could keep them on the floor all through the night to guard their obstruction. The real irony is that if the Republicans were in charge and the Democrats threw up a filibuster, the 'Repubs would kill that thing deader than Kelsey's nuts in a flash - you's never even see the shot.....
I agree ban the holds, cut out that stupid one person objection rule that Tuberville used and forget the 41 opponents on the floor at all times. Ban that damned filibuster. It promotes the tyranny of the majority. This is not the 1700's.
Oh, I agree the world would be a better place without the filibuster entirely - it is not constitutional and functions to empower the tyranny of the minority - but the Senate loves its toys and probably would not vote to ban the filibuster entirely. Since so many senators are "getting up there" in age, it would be fun to see how well they could keep them on the floor all through the night to guard their obstruction. The real irony is that if the Republicans were in charge and the Democrats threw up a filibuster, the 'Repubs would kill that thing deader than Kelsey's nuts in a flash - you's never even see the shot.....