Unreasonable GOP Demands on Filibuster

Re “Republicans Reject Democrats’ Offer to Settle Judicial Dispute,” April 27: The demand of Republican leaders in the Senate that Democrats pledge not to filibuster judicial nominees, especially Supreme Court nominees, is unreasonable. If the filibuster and the resulting requirement for a supermajority of 60 are ever needed, they are for lifetime nominations because the decisions are irreversible, unlike decisions on policy or taxation, which can be reversed when the other party returns to power.

Marcel Gawartin

Ladera Heights

“The use of obstructionist tactics, especially prolonged speechmaking, for the purpose of delaying legislative action” is the definition of the word “filibuster.” The founding fathers must spin in their graves to see what the Senate has wrought under the guise of seeking compromise. Common-sense discussion and reasoning together is how to reach agreement, not by making hostages of opponents for the sole purpose of hindering the entire Senate from performing its duty under the Constitution to advise and consent.

Maurice Harwick

Los Angeles

Re “Nuke the Filibuster,” editorial, April 26: So help me God, if the Democrats can ever claw their way back to power, they should rig the voting machines, purge the executive branch, pack the courts, eliminate Republican dissent, cripple industries that fund Republicans, bully the media to spout their propaganda, stage crises to usurp power and crush the Republicans forever. Now that would be a fair fight.

Gary Abramson

Los Angeles