Personal tools

Argument: Filibuster blocks small majorities ramming through unpopular laws

From Debatepedia

Jump to: navigation, search

Parent debate

Supporting quotations

Brien Jackson. "In Defense of the Filibuster". Below the Fold. February 17th, 2009: "having the filibuster as an option still restricts a relatively small majority that may not even acurrately reflect the will of the electorate from ramming through unpopular aspects of their agenda. [...] The most picture-perfect argument for the Senate is, ironically, that old bugaboo, the 2000 election. Until Jim Jeffords bailed on the GOP, Republicans controlled the House by 9 votes, had the majority of a 50-50 Senate split based on the tiebreaking vote of the Vice-President, and, of course, had control of the White House despite getting fewer votes for the office than the Democratic candidate. Additionally, they lost seats in both houses of Congress in 2000, including 4 in the Senate. Is there any real argument that this unified government was the result of the country’s overwhelming preference for the GOP agenda? Obviously not."

Problem with the site? 

Tweet a bug on bugtwits