re: #39 researchok

What’s wrong with the filibuster?

It’s become the default, along with other procedural gumming up the works maneuvers, and it’s made the Senate completely dysfunctional (all sorts of pressing business backlogged, federal court and admin vacancies unfilled) and no longer a majoritarian legislative body. You can potentially have a group of senators, representing as little as ~12% of the population blocking any legislation (though I doubt it ever is quite that stark since a couple of the low population states are blue).

There’s also the issue of it only requiring a single senator to filibuster, while ending it requires assembling 60+ supportive senators (which has been trouble for the Dems with various members bedridden, hospitalized, attending funerals, or otherwise indisposed). At the very least I’d like to see the rules changed so that the reverse is necessary, where the folks filibustering need 41+ senators on hand.