Comments about ‘Richard Davis: Require all filibusters to be like Sen. Rand Paul's’

Return to article »

Published: Wednesday, March 13 2013 12:00 a.m. MDT

  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Most recommended
Ogden, UT

Professor Davis is correct in all respects contained in this article. I absolutely agree. if a Senator wants to fillibuster, s/he should be forced to stay in the Senate room, stand up, and TALK.


I disagree with Paul's (stated) objective entirely, but do give him kudos for doing it properly.

This editorial is absolutely correct about the need for filibuster reform and offers a great plan for it.

Kent C. DeForrest
Provo, UT

Once again Richard nailed it. Thanks for the common sense. It is so rare nowadays.

South Jordan, UT

Rand Pauls tantrum lasted longer than it took the senate, the very next day to confirm the person he was fillibustering. Just another waste of time from the delusional GOP!!

m.g. scott

Normally a fillibuster is not conducted by one guy playing James Stewart. The reason fillibusters work is because if necessary, 10, 20 or even 30 Senators could trade off time on the floor and legally (according to Senate rules) hold up any other work. In the House of Representatives the minority has virtually no power. It is one party rule there. In the Senate the minority does have some power, what with 60 votes needed often, and the fillibuster. Iam a Republican, and have been frusturated in the past by Democrats using the fillibuster, but I'd never want our government to be so dominated by one party that the minority party had no power. So for me, long live the fillibuster until something better comes along.

to comment

DeseretNews.com encourages a civil dialogue among its readers. We welcome your thoughtful comments.
About comments