• @Veedem
    link
    English
    403 months ago

    Why not just make the filibuster what it used to be and require the people who want to wield it to hold the floor for hours upon hours with no break? Some of it was silly. Some of it heroic. Either way, it required someone to truly be willing to stand behind their beliefs and, thus, was used much less often.

    • @BrianTheeBiscuiteer
      link
      133 months ago

      I also liked the idea of a minority vote (2/5) to sustain a filibuster. If you don’t have 40 supporters, on the floor, then the filibuster ends.

    • @MegaUltraChicken
      link
      113 months ago

      it required someone to truly be willing to stand behind their beliefs

      Conservatives don’t typically have these, and the ones that do know how unpopular they are. That’s why they fight against any attempt to reign it in.

    • @Chee_Koala
      link
      73 months ago

      This seems like such a fair way to add some discomfort to filibustering and making it a bit less appealing.