3 ms·
Until Scott Brown's election last year, the Democrats could have ended any filibuster attempt immediately. Democrats had a free run for a year. For the a year
by hnal943 16y ago
Until Scott Brown's election last year, the Democrats could have ended any filibuster attempt immediately. Democrats had a free run for a year. For the a year and a half now, the public has been screaming for them to stop. Brown's election was the first shot across the bow, but the Democrats paid no heed.
- moxiemk1 16y agoIt's been a traditional courtsey in the Senate for the party in power not to shove through votes often, in respect that in the future they would eventually be the minority party, and occasionally need to filibuster as well. The possibility of removing the ability to filibuster has been discussed, but not undertaken for this reason. By filibustering so often, the Republicans are showing that this is no longer the custom. Which is fine; I think it's a silly custom, and we'd benefit as a nation if blocking legislation like that were impossible. But it is absolutely a break from common procedure.
- CWuestefeld 16y agoI think your memory is fuzzy. For example, under GWB, the Democrat's use of the filibuster was also frequent and controversial. There were judicial appointments that went unfilled for years because the Dem's refused to discuss them. (as much as it pains me to defend the GOP)