The Filibuster: Anachronistic or Essential?

image
Author: Henry Flatt
Published: 19 Jul, 2013
Updated: 14 Oct, 2022
3 min read

One of the primary reasons the US Congress has such a poor approval rating is attributable, at least in part, to a failure to produce meaningful, timely legislation.

Republicans and Democrats both claim that the other side to is blame. Many Republicans in Congress claim the other side is fiscally irresponsible, while congressional Democrats argue that blatant obstructionism is taking place. What is indisputable, however, is that one of the instruments used to delay the passage of legislation, the filibuster, has been recently used at an unprecedented rate.

A recent example where the filibuster was utilized as a tactic to obstruct rather than protect against poorly thought out legislation is the evidenced by the failed gun control debate. After the Newtown, Conn., massacre on December 14, 2012, the national spotlight shifted towards gun control and regulating firearms. For the first time in four years, the country prioritized gun control above gun ownership.

The proposed legislation authored by Senator Reid would have broadened background checks and increased the penalties for interstate gun traffickers. Led by Mitch McConnell (R-KY), Senate Republicans halted progress on the bill.

In a letter signed by Republican Senators, Rubio, Paul, and Cruz, expressed their uncompromising position. They claimed that the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution:

“Protects citizens rights to self-defense. It speaks to history’s lesson that government cannot be in all places at all times, and history’s warning about the oppression of a government that tries. We will oppose the motion to proceed to any legislation that will serve as a vehicle for additional gun restrictions.”

The filibuster by Senators Cruz, Rubio, and Paul in this instance was done primarily as a method of obstructing legislation. Politics, by nature, is the art of compromise. Rather than debating gun control legislation on the floor of the Senate, the aforementioned senators chose to essentially halt the bill and eliminate any possibility for it to proceed.

Allowing three Senators from the same caucus to halt monumental legislation without any public discourse is not how the filibuster was intended to be used.

For decades the rules of the filibuster have remain unchanged until recently. Senate Majority Leader (D-NV) proposed an updated plan to curb filibuster use during executive branch nominees.

On the other hand, Senator Rand Paul's (R-KY) filibuster of John Brennan on March 9, 2013, had a much different effect. It served a more productive purpose.

IVP Donate

One of the victims of United States drone strikes was Anwar al-Awlaki, an American citizen who later became radicalized and allegedly plotted attacks against the United States in coordination with al-Qaeda. Whether or not al-Awlaki had been plotting against the United States is of small importance to Senator Paul, rather what is important is that an American citizen was executed by the United States government without due process of law.

While on the floor during his 13-hour long filibuster Paul said:

“No American should be killed by a drone on American soil without first being charged with a crime, without first being found guilty of a crime by a court. How can you kill someone without going to a judge, or a jury?”

Prolonged debate on the floor of Congress, as evidenced by Paul’s filibuster, allows for unlawful government activity to be highly scrutinized.

In contrast to Senator Paul’s filibuster demanding additional information for the use of drone strikes, the filibuster used to thwart gun control legislation did so to block a given bill from becoming law. Perhaps additional rules will be passed to alter the nature of filibusters similar to gun control toward debate elucidating unlawful drone strikes.

Latest articles

CA capitol building dome with flags.
Why is CA Senator Mike McGuire Trying to Kill the Legal Cannabis Industry?
California’s legal cannabis industry is under mounting pressure, and in early June, state lawmakers and the governor appeared poised to help. A bill to freeze the state’s cannabis excise tax at 15% sailed through the State Assembly with a unanimous 74-0 vote. The governor’s office backed the plan. And legal cannabis businesses, still struggling to compete with unregulated sellers and mounting operating costs, saw a glimmer of hope....
03 Jul, 2025
-
7 min read
I voted buttons
After First RCV Election, Charlottesville Voters Back the Reform: 'They Get It, They Like It, They Want to Do It Again'
A new survey out of Charlottesville, Virginia, shows overwhelming support for ranked choice voting (RCV) following the city’s first use of the system in its June Democratic primary for City Council. Conducted one week after the election, the results found that nearly 90% of respondents support continued use of RCV....
03 Jul, 2025
-
3 min read
Crowd in Time Square.
NYC Exit Survey: 96% of Voters Understood Their Ranked Choice Ballots
An exit poll conducted by SurveyUSA on behalf of the nonprofit better elections group FairVote finds that ranked choice voting (RCV) continues to be supported by a vast majority of voters who find it simple, fair, and easy to use. The findings come in the wake of the city’s third use of RCV in its June 2025 primary elections....
01 Jul, 2025
-
6 min read