We The people -[ That Is, Citizens Of The United States Of America]- Whom Resides Within The “Territorial-Jurisdictions” Of These States That Make-Up, What Is Known As The United States:
” Have Come To Learn, That Our Great Legislative [Houses] And [Chambers] Where The Work Of The People In Government, Is Carried Out For The People By Government— ” Have Created [many Rules] For The Operational-Aspects, Within Those Great [Houses] And [Chambers]Of The People To Wit : [ The U.S. Senate Parliamentarian Procedural Rule Of The Filibuster]. “
A ” Rule ” That Is Political – Weaponized Like That Of A [ Double-Edged Sword]. The Following Is An Example(s) Of Why I View It As A Double-Edged Sword :
. If Was A United States Senator( Of The Minority Political Party), Presented With A [ Congressional-Bill ], That In It’s Language And Construction, Would In Result ( If Passed By A Majority Vote) Either [Abridge] The People Already Established [ Constutional-Rights] And/Or [ Infringe]Upon [Rights] Already Enacted -(That Expanded On Doing That Which Was Right And Which Would Benefit The All Of The People, Within The State That Reside And The United States) :
” I Would Use The The U.S. Senate’s Parliamentary [ Filibuster] Procedural Rule — ” To Protect Both, The People’s [ Constitutional-Rights] And [ Rights That Were Expanded on Via The Enactment Of Legistslative Body]. “
Thus, Given This View With Regard To The ” Filibuster-Rule ” I Wouldn’t Vote To Abolish The Rule.
However, I’m Of My Personal Opinion- (That The Congressional Matter Of the ” We The people Act [H.R. 1)] That Was Put Forth, Before The Honorable U.S. Senators For Vote)- That The ” Filibuster Procedural Rule ” Was Drawn With The Other Edge Of The Sword, For The Following Congressional Reason(s) :
[A]. Stagnation, [B]. Regression and [C]. For The Oppression of Citizens Of The United States Whom Resides Within The Many Different States ,Of The Union, 15th Amendment Right To Vote. My Opinion Is Based On The Fact That The ” We The People Act( H.R.1) Expanded [ Voter-Rights] For All Citizens Within The United States ( Neither “Abridging” On Their 15th Amendment Constitutional Right..Or.. “Infringing “on The Rights Left In The [ Voter-Rights-Bill] That Was Disected By The United States Supreme Court.
Further, I’ve Been Pondering The Aforementioned [Title-Question] Above For Some Time Now– ” And, I’m Of The Opinion That There Should Also Be A[ Checks And Balance parliamentary Legistlative Bill’s Test Procedural Rule] In Place, That Would Allow,For The Bypassing Of The ” Filibuster-Rule”, In The Endeavor for Allowing “The People” In Their Determination Of Government ( Via, Their Respective Senators) To Govern Through Consensus, Resolution And/Or Vote.
I, Feel That Given [A]. The Constitutional-Ideaology Of The [ Establishers] And [ Writers] Under The Title Preamble In The [ Constitution] Of The United States Of America, That My Below Standard, For Determing Whether Bypassing The Filibuster Procedural Rule,Is Warranted :
. To Determine Whether Any Proposed Legislation( Bill) Meets The “[Constitutional-Ideaology] Of The ” Establishers” And “Writers” Expressed Under The [Title Preamble]– “As The First Step To Warrant The forward Progress Of A Legislatived-Bill,Resolution And/Or Vote.”
. To Determine Whether The Any Proposed Legislation Either [ Abridge] And/Or Have The Potential–” To Abridge Rights Already Established In The [ Constitution] Of The United States..And/Or.. Rights Already Established Through Congressional Enactments That Have Expanded On Rights That are Established By The Constitution,To Warrant The forward Progress Of A Legislative-Bill, Resolution And/Or Vote.
. To Also, Look To The [ Charter] Of The United Nations-( Given, That The United States Helped to Draw It)– ” In A Endeavor To Determine ,Whether Or Not, Any [Ideaology-Aspects] Written In said [ Charter] Could Either Support And/Or Be Rearranged, As A [ Balancing-Element To Warrant The forward Progress Of A Legislative-Bill, Resolution And/Or Vote.
Sincerely And Respectfully.