History Of Filibuster Essay

This controversial topic has even been the topic for various movies including the 1939 movie, Mr. Smith goes to Washington. With such a great exposure, is it really that bad? The filibuster is something that impairs policy making from occurring. The Senate should eliminate the use of the filibuster completely.

The political theorists David R. Mayhew, Gary W. Cox, and Matthew D. McCubbins argue on how the US Congress functions. They focus on the members of Congress and their actions. The basis of disagreement between the theorists lies in what Congress members find of importance. Mayhew argues that members of Congress, primarily concern themselves with reelection, as such, any action taken only benefits that. Cox and McCubbins’, however, formulate that Congress functions on the basis of majority party control and unity.

The minority starts a filibuster by extending a debate or by making long speeches, which usually takes hours. Senators treat filibusters as bargaining chips to negotiate with the majority, which dominates the Senate with more senators elected. Because “the Senate has no Rules Committee and instead determines the length and structure of its debates by unanimous consent agreement” (English 109), the definition of filibuster varies. It usually depends on the context of debates between parties on specific bills. Senators can regard any speeches delivered by the opposition as filibusters, if they believe that those speeches are intended to delay the voting of a bill.

The difference in ideological views and decision making within congress creates a separation of agreement among the legislative decisions as whole and prevents logical and neutral policy making ( Wilson pg 12). The polarity in congress prevents neutralism and supports individualism due to the strongly motivated ideologies from each member instead of a unified unit that functions singularly An important hierarchy and responsibility of the legislative branch determines the order and ability for policies and laws to be stable and without bias. Individualism clouds the overall objective of creating stability in the United States. “Congress has, to a decree,been deinstitutionalized and individualized: its leadership has become weaker,power within it has been dispersed” (Wilson pg 13).

Congressional Gridlock Congressional Gridlock is a recurring issue in America’s political system, and it is crippling the efficacy of the governments ability to lead the country to overall prosperity. Gridlock, in terms of politics, refers to the inability for the political system to adequately satisfy the needs of the citizens in that country. In reference to Congress, a gridlock is when the people cannot be satisfied due to disagreements in legislation that hinder the process of making laws. One recent consequence of congressional gridlock is the congressional stand still concerning gun violence in our nation and the oppositions on what affect, if any, it has on gun laws. Another example of a congressional gridlock is the lengthy wait for

There’s have been times when people were not happy with how long it has taken to pass a law since the process it self is a very long process. Even the founding fathers themselves created a constitution which benefited themselves in the beginning but had ratified it as time went by for the benefits of their country and the

Term limits are the limits on a term an elected official can serve. Some officials, like the president, have two terms but some, like senators, don 't have any term limits. A pro of having term limits is allowing new people to be in congress. New people bring new ideas and it prevents old officials from making a career out of what they are doing. Being in congress is not suppose to be a career; its suppose to be more like a temporary job.

Congressional term limits have been what restricted the amount of time that anyone can work in office whether it be to a representative, senator, or even the president. People have debated over keeping or losing the term limits, since each come with their own benefits and faults at the same time. In the argument for term limits, some may argue that they are necessary because, “Congress will be more responsible toward their constituents because they will soon be constituents themselves” (Weeks). The validity in this statement proves to be one of the strongest arguments because the creation of laws is mean to serve all people, and if the people in office had complete immunity, it would serve unfair and unjust to the rest of society. For this reason, it always will make those in office consider how impactful and

Justice Stephens wrote the majority opinion stating that the power to vote for legislative members should be directly chosen by the people, not by the States. Powell v. McCormack established that the Qualification Clause for Congress listed in the Constitution are exclusive and the “fundamental principle of our representative democracy.” Adding such limitations to candidates takes away the direct vote from the people and destroys the “uniform national system” that the Constitution wanted for Congress. The Framers recognized that electing the legislature was a new idea that stemming from the Constitution, thus, not a right of the “original powers” of the states. The court also concluded that Framers divested the states of any power to add qualifications, because there was no right before the ratification of the Constitution.

The founders wanted the Senate to view the impact of their decisions at a national level. They wanted the senate to take a methodical approach to voting. Members of the senate remain in office on six-year terms, much longer then their House of Representative counter parts. The idea behind a six-year term is to provide a form of barrier from the people; this allowed the senate to make long-term decisions rather then, what is developing now. Members of the Senate are also required to be a minimum 30 years of age, as opposed to the 25 years of age for House members.

Back in 1788, the larger states were happier with their representation in the House. They had more population and where entitled to more reps. The representation in the Senate made the small states happier because each state was given the same amount. It ensured all states had equal say. The most important document, written in 1788, guarded against the possibility of an individual or group from getting too much power.

A filibuster is a tactic in the legislative process sometimes used in the US Senate by opponents of a bill to block its passage. In the Senate use their unique right to unlimited debate as a way to prevent or delay the Senate from ever voting on a bill. Senator’s work together can practically debate forever, tying up the legislative agenda until the proponents of a bill finally give up their battle. Filibusters are not allowed in the House of Representatives because House rules limit the time allowed for debate on bills. In 2013 because of Democratic frustration about filibusters of judicial and executive branch nominees the filibuster’s rules changed.

This slower process lets government slow down and seriously consider the pros and cons of a certain bill, and make a clean

Abolishing the filibuster could result in similar congressional errs becoming

The US Constitution was created in 1787. It was all about putting confidence in the citizens that they would be taken care of no matter what. It was very important to the people who wrote the Constitution that everything that was written would come to firmition. In certain situations the Constitution was held to its principles and in some instances it fell flat. When talking about the Whiskey Rebellion, Jefferson did a good job trying to support the citizens of the States.