Two months ago, the filibuster was hated more than Tierra on the Bachelor.

Today, it’s a reminder of how — if used properly — it can enhance our democracy and give voice to a desperately-needed minority opinion.

In protest of John Brennan’s nomination to run the CIA, Senator Rand Paul took to the Senate floor this afternoon to voice his objection. Using a technique known as the “talking filibuster,” Paul is literally stalling the process of nomination by talking nonstop. Like 11 hours straight (with some help from fellow Senators for momentary breaks).

And you thought Braveheart on TNT was long.

The filibuster itself is a Senate tradition of obstructing legislation. A Senator is granted unlimited time to debate before a vote, and if he chooses to, can technically debate on the floor indefinitely, or “filibuster”. It’s like pulling the fire alarm to avoid taking a final exam and doing it over and over again. Except on Capitol Hill, it’s applauded.

This method of stalling has been traditionally used with the aim of either a) garnering attention to an overlooked or defeated opinion; or b) jamming up the legislative process so badly everyone else says “Oh the hell with it, you win” and removes the vote or legislation from the floor. Sixty votes can end a filibuster — a motion called “cloture”, or as the cooler Senators say “a rock to your scissors” — but is usually hard to gather due to partisan lines.

As this post is being written, Sen. Paul is still at it, talking away to probably just the interns left to clean up after everyone’s gone home.

But make no mistake, Sen. Paul’s filibuster today is important and vital to our democracy for one major reason: Continue reading →