Richard Davis: Require all filibusters to be like Sen. Rand Paul's

Return To Article
Add a comment
  • m.g. scott LAYTON, UT
    March 14, 2013 1:01 p.m.

    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.

  • homebrew South Jordan, UT
    March 14, 2013 8:16 a.m.

    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!!

  • Kent C. DeForrest Provo, UT
    March 13, 2013 2:39 p.m.

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

  • Maudine SLC, UT
    March 13, 2013 5:47 a.m.

    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.

  • Furry1993 Ogden, UT
    March 13, 2013 5:24 a.m.

    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.