The filibuster. Good or bad?
 

Writing a paper on this topic, but I have to take the latter opinion.

HOWEVER, I want to see what everybody thinks.

Currently, the filibuster has become severely less infamous, as those managing the floor hold back legislation that even has a supposed threat of filibuster in order to clear through the ever increasing workload of the modern senate.

While most Senators embrace the ideal of unlimited debate, there has to be a point at which unlimited becomes too much. While I believe there should be some tools to which a sizable minority should be able to oppose legislation, the previously ridiculous and dramatic escapades, and the modern stifling gloom the filibuster presents seems to be the wrong tool.

I've yet to think of a better solution, however.

My issue with the filibuster is that you no longer actually have to do it. All you have to do is state you intend to filibuster. I think you should have to stand there and read the goddamn phonebook if you want to filibust(is this a word? it should be.).

I'd just recite all the lines from Mr. Smith Goes to Washington.

Christ, Jimmy Stewart is hot.