Tom Harkin: “Let me just quote from a couple of these editorials, because I think it really puts things in the proper perspective.…”

“Let me just quote from a couple of these editorials, because I think it really puts things in the proper perspective. First, let me quote from the Des Moines Register's sterling editorial of the 23d of November. The modern filibuster gives the minority an absolute veto. It is, quite simply, undemocratic. Defenders of the filibuster have argued that it is useful in preventing precipitous action. Harkin's proposal addresses that argument by allowing filibusters to delay action, but not stop it completely. Under his plan, the number of votes required to end a filibuster would gradually decline over a period of weeks until, eventually, only 51 votes would be needed. A truer reform would be to abolish the undemocratic anachronism outright. Harkin's proposal is quite modest. There should be no reasonable objection to it. And this from the Fort Worth Star Telegram, Fort Worth, TX. If you started out to formulate the rules for a legislative body in a new democracy, the last example you would follow would be that of the U.S. Senate. Things have gotten so bad in the Senate that there is a growing movement to change the rules about unlimited debate-- the filibusters that prevent action on legislation. If extended debate were really used to examine issues and change senators' minds by force of powerful reason, there would be a case for keeping the present rules.…”