Fix The Senate Now: The Case for Filibuster Reform
By Jane Susskind on 01/08/2013 in filibuster reform, Fix the Senate Now, infographic with 3 CommentsRead Time: 2 - 2 minutes
Since 2009, the Senate has spent 2,880 hours waiting to move forward because of Senate procedures such as the filibuster. Under the current rules, 60 votes are required for any measure to proceed. Far from the original constitutional intent of the founders, the 60-vote requirement on filibuster has arguably led to stagnation and abuse in the Senate.
While Reps Jeff Merkley (D-Oregon), John McCain (R-Arizona) and Carl Levin (D-Michigan) propose competing filibuster reforms, organizations focused on reform are tackling the issue online through the Fix The Senate Now coalition. Among the organizations are the Alliance for Justice, the Brennan Center, the Communications Workers of America(CWA), Common Cause, the Sierra Club, United Auto Workers (UAW) and Voices for Progress.
As part of their push for a more balanced Senate, the coalition is ”re-engaging, making the case that substantial Senate rules reform in the next Congress.” Below is an infographic making their case:
Source: Upworthy and Fix The Senate Now
Leave Your Comment →
3 Comments
Alex Gauthier
01.08.2013
@alexg
those cloture motions are crazy. more filibusters in the last ten years than the first half of the 20th century combined
Dave Wildon
01.08.2013
I would only be for something like this if there was legislation reform to be sure every bill that was being put through was transparent, single issues with no riders, available to the public easily, and actually needed.
I feel reforming filibusters without stopping the sheer magnitude of bills that go through every year would be irresponsible since there is no way to assure the people of what those thousands and thousands of laws would be, or even that they are actually needed and desirable, not merely freedom restriction, hidden taxes or loopholes of some sort. The Congress could much too easily collaborate to slip legislation through since congressmen are not required to read every bill, yet would be unable to stop say, a bill that has been fastracked.. due to having to construct arguments and secure a floor position to speak AND convince a sizeable number to agree.
Roger Ford
01.14.2013
@roger_ford
Clearly participation in the legislative process is a requirement, even for holding a filibuster. Of course the rules must be reformed, if only to protect the legislative branch from itself. As the current discussion, at least in some quarters, regarding gun control shows, more people than seems comfortable find the House and Senate irrelevant. They either want Presidential action or more lobbying, depending on the end they desire and the course they think will achieve it (generally because of past results).
Anyhow, a filibuster should require at least physical effort. Otherwise it mocks the institution.