As far as I know the ability to drag your feet is one of the main powers of our elected officials if they disagree with the way things go; they can usually just

As far as I know the ability to drag your feet is one of the main powers of our elected officials if they disagree with the way things go; they can usually just do nothing until someone gets voted out of office or dies or the political winds change. Forcing action oftentimes can lead to shortsighted actions which have long term negative effects, I don't know if forcing the hands of people I generally disagree with would result in a better status quo for us all. eg In the supreme court example the republicans are playing political football with people that could have easily gotten confirmed under a republican president(a stupid game which does nothing but hurt the country), but how do you distinguish that from legit dragging your feet/filibustering political appointees that are actually bad for us all? The correct action in a democracy to those who refuse to do their jobs in public office is to vote out the people and replace them with people who will move forward, but as polls show people are generally happy with their representation and blame others for their problems.