Filibusters

Late to the party again, and woefully unread, I still have to rant about filibusters.

I keep seeing these highly read liberal blogs saying, "Maybe we ought to kill the filibuster. After all, then the great changes WE want could be made." The phrase that keeps coming to mind is pennywise and pound foolish.

It is harder to revoke legislation than to pass it even with the hurdles that include the filibuster. Every hurdle that hinders the passage of desparately needed legislation (desparately needed, on review, by a small but vocal majority, who may or may not be right in the end) is a hurdle that also hinders the passage of ugly legislation meant to repay the narrow partisan interests of the bad guys. (Perhaps obviously, I find the need to remark on one man's terrorist and another's freedom fighter comes to mind.)

I really believe that the truly important legislation will be passed despite the hurdles, though it may take more time. I for one am willing to accept the extra time and sweat as a protection against the narrow interests and short sightedness of others.

Kill the filibuster? Heck no, let's require a supermajority on every bill. And do away with 'consent clauses' as well - let's make the houses read every bill aloud on the floor without a "we accept it as read" agreement. And on, and on, and on...