PROPOSED AMENDMENT: Anti-filibuster No super-majority in either chamber of Congress shall be necessary for the passage of any question before that body, except as provided in this Constitution; nor may any minority be allowed to delay action by a chamber for a period longer than three months. (possible: If a chamber’s rules allow a minority to delay action on a question before that body, then the rule shall provide a blocking minority twice the amount of floor time [with a minimum of three days’ time] to address the question at issue as the majority allocates itself on the question)
I do not like the way the filibuster works. I admit that my favor of the filibuster is subject to who is in the majority. I would modify the filibuster differently, but add it to the Constitution so any new majority cannot wipe it away.
In this greatest democracy in world history, we have one part of the equation that is totally anti-majoritarian, and a huge impediment to implementing in policy the will of the people—the United States Senate. Because the senate is apportioned two to a state regardless of population, then a fairly small minority of the people of America can thwart the will of the majority in the Senate. This is okay--it was necessary, but should not be allowed to stop the will of the majority indefinitely.
Filibuster has worked for and against certain agendas. For example corey booker's recent filibuster was very positive.
This content is created by the open source Your Priorities citizen engagement platform designed by the non profit Citizens Foundation