Poll Shows Few Americans Understand Senate Filibuster Rules

Reader Comments
Back to blog

Hey! I've saved your site because you have so great posts here and I would like to read some more^^

calculatormortgagee of VA 7:14AM January 23, 2012

Nice dispatch and this enter helped me alot in my college assignement. Say thank you you seeking your information.

WP Themes of AL 9:33AM February 20, 2010

The problem of the required super-majority in the Senate is multiplied for Democrats/liberals/Progressives by the way the Senate is constituted, 2 for each state and what the two parties want to do. Because Republicans?conservatives dominate in small rural states they gain a meaningful statistical edge in the Senate and the electoral college. With the Brown election the 41 Republican Senators only represent 35% of US population. A new poll indicates the 10 reddest states, they have 15,000,000 people. Thats 20 votes in the Senate representing 5% of the population. Also since conservatives can generally achieve their goals by "starving government" and cutting taxes they don't need a 60 vote super-majority, they can do that using reconciliation as they did with the Bush tax cuts. This means that a republican president with 50 votes in the Senate (that perhaps represent around 42% of Americans can get what they want passed.
Republicans have this built in edge with or without the filibuster. Karl Rove figured this out and got Bush elected in 2000. Without the votes in the electoral college represented by the Senate Gore would have won by 17 votes in the electoral college. With a Supreme Court split 5 to 4 because of a presidential election tilted to the right caused by an electoral college tilted right because of the way seats in the senate are tilted to the right is it a surprise that real change is hamstrung by reactionary's and that as a result the nation is drifting.

paulorandall of IL 12:34PM February 02, 2010

Make them read the bible, whatever.
At least we will have the video of them filibustering. Then use that video with the video during Bush when they went after Dems for filibustering.
They are hypocrites. IOKIYAR

Hyper of TX 5:41PM February 01, 2010

The president should tell the senate to not be afraid of the Filibuster. I wish they could get rid of the ridiculous Nebraska and Mississippi pork and get down to the core of providing health care. Let the republicans filibuster.. hope they like to stand, not go to the bathroom and let the public watch them talk about their wifes, girlfriends and boyfriends (for the stall tappers) all day. Let the public see how obstructionism works and let the public remember it come election day.

Wolf of MD 2:06PM February 01, 2010

It's not a subject that how much probability Obama has to vanquish the war of healthcare.It's a subject that when the Republican Party will lose the superiority to control the Senate.Obama steps upward for the healthcare,while the Republican look at the opposite direction.

joey of FL 7:29AM February 01, 2010

REPUBLICAN ARGUMENT THAT THEY ARE NOT A PARTY OF NO DOESN'T HOLD WATER
And here is why. It doesn't matter how many ideas (however wishy-washy and generalized) Republicans present, they usually say no when it comes to the crunch--when voting time comes. This has happened repeatedly. They have even voted repeatedly against Bills that they co-sponsored, making it clear that their saying no is a matter of political strategy. In the Senate, we cannot forget the end result of the work of the "gang of six." None of the three Republicans in the Finance Committee in that group voted for the final product in the full Senate even though Democrats accepted most of their ideas which were incorporated into the final Bill. It is simply a shell game that Republicans are playing—and Democrats, especially the President, must continue to point this out. Do Republicans have some ideas? Yes. But what kind? How well-baked? And what happens when it comes to moving thing forward? They always say no, always! Finally, Republicans say they oppose on principle. Don't Democrats have the same right? And didn’t Democrats have a huge mandate for their ideas? They won big, didn’t they? Yet, they have tried to compromise—without getting a single Republican vote on any of the big, critical issues facing the country. Republicans say they have “better ideas.” That's just not true. Just look at which administrations have racked up the biggest deficits while in power: Reagan (so far the biggest); Bush I & II more than any Democrat. Republicans don't have a record of fiscal responsibility to run on. They only “talk” responsibility when they are not in power. It’s all an eye wash.

Dr. Sam of CA 10:54AM January 31, 2010

I think their should be a rule that requires for a bill to be passed it must have 1/3 of the minority party and 51% of the Senate and House. This would ensure that both parties actually work together for the good of America.
Of course I think that any amendments to a bill should refer to that bill and not something they snuck in referring another law, and I think that sneaking in earmarks should be illegal (maybe have a dedicated earmark bill twice a year) but we know none of these will ever happen.

American Citizen of ND 4:14PM January 30, 2010

I don't know how good the poll is. If it's anywhere near the truth, I'm even more dismayed that Americans are as confused about facts as they are laughable in logically processing information. The poll didn't say which demographic group might account the most for this low percentage?

jon of IN 10:42AM January 30, 2010

I used to be a Republican, then an independent, now a Democrat. The Republicans shoot themselves in the foot by their total dedication to all members towing the line and not veering in any way. That doesn't aid bi-partisanship. That means that most legislation is a 60% vote instead of what the government was set up to be - a 51% vote. That is wrong. We need to work together.

S.Thomas of TX 9:10AM January 30, 2010