The filibuster is a tradition in the Senate. But until recently, it is a tradition that was rarely used. That was because senators knew that the Senate was supposed to be a majority-rule institution, and the filibuster (which requires 60 votes to stop) was only to be used in extreme cases. That is no longer the case.After the election of President Obama, the Republicans met and decided to use every tool at their disposal to obstruct anything the president tried to do -- including the filibuster. And they have done that. They have used the filibuster more than any Senate in the past -- much more. They have abused the filibuster tradition. They have used it simply to obstruct -- blocking all the president's nominees for executive and judicial positions, and blocking efforts to fix the economy and create jobs. They just didn't want the president to get credit for any positive accomplishment.
Recently the Senate Democrats finally had their fill of this obstruction of presidential nominees, and they used the so-called "nuclear option" to change Senate rules. This allows judicial and executive nominees to get an up or down vote by requiring only 51 votes to invoke cloture and stop a filibuster (but kept in place the 60 vote requirement for filibusters against Supreme Court nominees and legislation) -- a reasonable move that preserves the filibuster for important items (which it traditionally was intended for), but allows the government to fill jobs that are badly needed.
The Republicans are angry though. They don't like this tool of obstruction removed, and they have been trying to paint the Democratic move as a "grab for power" -- a power play designed to deny the GOP a voice in government. This is ridiculous, but it does bring up the following question -- what does the public think about the filibuster and the "nuclear option"?
A new Economist/YouGov Poll tried to answer that question. Their survey was done between November 23rd and 25th of 1,000 nationwide adults, and has a margin of error of 3.8 points.
It turns out that the American public is not nearly as enamored with the filibuster as the senators are. Equal amounts (34%) believe the filibuster is a good thing and a bad thing, and 32% either don't care or don't know what to think about it. And the same is true of the invoking of the "nuclear option". While 35% disapprove of that, another 65% are not that upset by it -- with 30% approving of it, 16% neither approving nor disapproving, and 19% unsure what to think.
There is one thing about the filibuster that a significant majority of Americans do agree on. About 75% (or three out of every four) say if a senator does filibuster, it should be a "talking filibuster" (with that senator being required to be present and participate until the filibuster is over). Only 17% think a senator should be able to filibuster without being physically present.
