If this is remotely accurate then it is a massive rise over the last few decades.
Where do I state how it should be? All I am saying that the filibuster as it is today is grinding the US legislative process to a halt on so many fronts because of personal or partisan pives, often totally unrelated to the legislation at hand.I always get a kick out of Europeans explaining how they think the American government should be.
And because of this I suggest a different form of some kind that cant be used in the manner the filibuster is being used today.
I have no problem with a temporary block being put on legislation based on the merits of the legislation, but as it stands now we have Senators blocking everything from nominations to legislation based on personal issues often that have nothing to do with the legislation.
But regardless the blocking should be temporary so that more discussion can be done and maybe a common position found instead of totally blocking a vote on the darn thing.. that is so undemocratic that it is almost sickening. That one senator can block critical nominations, legislation is a dictatorship of the minority of one to the extreme.
Why do American's always resort to this supposed insult to divert attention away from the topic? pathetic attitude. Every country have different ways of doing things, some good some bad. The filibuster is one of the only bad things I can come up with in the US legislative system. I love the idea of two houses of Congress have to agree on legislation and the principle of getting a bi-partisan support.. we Europeans could learn about that. Often our legislation is very one sided.I suppose you want our government to be socialist, and the people subjects like the rest of the Europeans.