I do not think that filibusters are undemocratic, in fact I think they are just the opposite. Filibusters are a way for Senators to express their opinions. While filibusters may hinder the congressional process, it allows senators to fully express their interests and ideas if they would like. Filibusters are also a way for senators to interrupt the legislative process in order to prevent a policy they don’t agree with from proceeding. Filibusters are also regulated and can be stopped by a cloture. Filibusters also prevent the rights of the minority from being infringed upon. (Edwards 376)
I agree that filibusters are undemocratic. Filibusters allow the Senate to prevent legislation from being passed. The Senate's job is to look out for his constituents. If the legislation that might get passed hurts their constituents in any way, it is up to the Senators to stop it. Therefore, when a Senator filibusters, they are doing what they think is right for him and his constituents. Therefore, I think that the filibuster should be continued.
I agree that filibusters are not undemocratic, I also fully support the opinion of giving a fight chance to those in Congress who are in the minority. I also believe that it proves a real standpoint on whatever issue is being filibustered. Due to the fact filibusters are so rare, it could provoke media attention which could in turn, introduce the public to a whole new set of issues. (keithhennessey.com)
I think that in some ways, filibusters are undemocratic. You just talk so much that no one wants to hear you anymore. THe democratic thing to do is to vote on the issue.
Filibusters are not undemocratic because they're used to stop legislation from being passed standing on the podium for countless hours. It represents the fact that the minority has the opportunity to reign over the majority.
I agree with Erin that filibusters are not undemocratic. As she said, it can be used by a minority to defeat a majority. Working together, like-minded senators can practically debate forever, trying up the legislative agenda until the proponents of a bill finally give up their battle. In essence, they literally talk the bill to death. In regards to cloture, a filibuster can be halted, but many senators are reluctant to vote for cloture for fear of setting a precedent to be used against them when they want to filibuster. This means that anyone can use a filibuster in the Senate and no one wants to give it up.
I do not think that filibusters are undemocratic, in fact I think they are just the opposite. Filibusters are a way for Senators to express their opinions. While filibusters may hinder the congressional process, it allows senators to fully express their interests and ideas if they would like. Filibusters are also a way for senators to interrupt the legislative process in order to prevent a policy they don’t agree with from proceeding. Filibusters are also regulated and can be stopped by a cloture. Filibusters also prevent the rights of the minority from being infringed upon. (Edwards 376)
ReplyDeleteI agree that filibusters are undemocratic. Filibusters allow the Senate to prevent legislation from being passed. The Senate's job is to look out for his constituents. If the legislation that might get passed hurts their constituents in any way, it is up to the Senators to stop it. Therefore, when a Senator filibusters, they are doing what they think is right for him and his constituents. Therefore, I think that the filibuster should be continued.
DeleteI agree that filibusters are not undemocratic, I also fully support the opinion of giving a fight chance to those in Congress who are in the minority. I also believe that it proves a real standpoint on whatever issue is being filibustered. Due to the fact filibusters are so rare, it could provoke media attention which could in turn, introduce the public to a whole new set of issues. (keithhennessey.com)
DeleteI think that in some ways, filibusters are undemocratic. You just talk so much that no one wants to hear you anymore. THe democratic thing to do is to vote on the issue.
DeleteFilibusters are not undemocratic because they're used to stop legislation from being passed standing on the podium for countless hours. It represents the fact that the minority has the opportunity to reign over the majority.
DeleteI agree with Erin that filibusters are not undemocratic. As she said, it can be used by a minority to defeat a majority. Working together, like-minded senators can practically debate forever, trying up the legislative agenda until the proponents of a bill finally give up their battle. In essence, they literally talk the bill to death. In regards to cloture, a filibuster can be halted, but many senators are reluctant to vote for cloture for fear of setting a precedent to be used against them when they want to filibuster. This means that anyone can use a filibuster in the Senate and no one wants to give it up.
ReplyDelete