There's an American legislature that works just fine without filibusters.

[backscatter712]

No no no, it's not Congress.

It's actually my state's legislature, the Colorado General Assembly.

It has a 65 member House of Representatives and a 35 member Senate. In both houses, debate is strictly limited, so no filibusters. To prevent the kind of shenanigans where one party passes bills in the middle of the night, or when members of the other party are stuck in the middle of a blizzard, each bill must undergo three separate readings, with time between each reading. (Incidentally, these midnight shenanigans are the original reason for unlimited debate in the US Senate, which is why the filibuster is possible.)

The worst an obstructionist minority can do in the General Assembly to delay a bill is use an amendment parade, or force full readings of long bills instead of waiving the reading as usual (the Republicans in Colorado, in response to a Democratic demand for a full reading of a bill, once distributed pages of the bill to 30 GOP lawmakers, brought them all the the podium and had them all read their pages all at once to technically comply with the requirements that a bill be read...)

In any case, Colorado has done just fine for 100 years without filibusters in its state legislature.

Lesson to be learned?

KILL THE FILIBUSTER!!!

[xchrom]

1. Kill the filibuster for now -- reinstitue if dems

Think they may lose the majority.

Be tactical and brutal -- but do your job which is
to govern.

[cali]

5. lol. and you don't think the pukes will simply do away with it if they're

in the majority if the dems do away with it and then reinstitute it after losing the majority but before the pukes take power?

[backscatter712]

8. Even if Dems lose the majority, overall, it's better without the filibuster.

Think of it. Play it out.

There's 2 scenarios.

With the filibuster, the Repubs take control, they want to enact their bullshit, they get DINOs to cross the aisle, they throw temper tantrums, and in general, we get forced to only filibuster a few things. That's what happened under Bush, isn't it? They get everything they want, but when they go too far and get their asses thrown out, they filibuster everything when Dems try repealing their bullshit.

Or scenario 2, without the filibuster. Repubs get what they want when they get the majority, but as I stated, even with the filibuster, they would have gotten what they wanted anyways. But when the voters get pissed off, throw them out and give the Senate back to us, we're able to repeal their bullshit because they're not filibustering everything.

[donheld]

2. Go CO

[Unvanguard]

3. I'm pretty sure the US Senate is the only legislature in the world with the filibuster. n/t

[tomm2thumbs]

4. seems like teabaggers would like it since it has nothing to do with the Constitution

they like that sort of thing I hear - unless they are on the side of controlling things, then it's 'what Constitution?'

[Vidar]

6. K&R.

[AllentownJake]

7. We all know that this device

Historically has been predominantly been used in the question of slavery and civil rights.

[backscatter712]

9. Very true.

The filibuster has historically been used far more often to attack civil rights and liberty than it has to protect it.

KILL IT!!!

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

10. You are right Robert Byrd filibustered the Civil Rights Acot of 1964.