RightatNYU said:
I can't find anything. I looked for it, but I've yet to see anyplace offer an opposing argument. However, I think this is more of a result of the fact that the statement offered by your source is rather out there. I have never heard a similar argument made, and have no reason to take the word of a fellow at Cato above anyone else. I personally have no reason to belive that it's true, and one of my professors who is knowledgeable on the subject intimated the same to me.
Changes occurred as recently as 1987. How much of a tradition is that?
I wasn't referring to the specific case of the filibuster. My point is that the attitude put forth in that article, saying that "no prior senate can lay down rules for the current senate" is detrimental to the political process.
Please comment on the references to Kennedy, Biden, et.al. They didn't seem to concerned about tradition.
What references are you referring to? The bill from 95 where they wanted to end all filibusters? It was political maneuvering by the left then, just as this is political maneuvering by the right now. You don't have to convince
me that Kennedy is a hypocritical douchebag.