filibuster

简明释义

英[ˈfɪlɪbʌstə(r)]美[ˈfɪlɪbʌstər]

n. 海盗；暴兵，掠夺兵；阻挠议事的议员；阻挠议事的行动

vt. 阻碍议案通过

vi. 掠夺；阻饶议事

复 数 f i l i b u s t e r s

第 三 人 称 单 数 f i l i b u s t e r s

现 在 分 词 f i l i b u s t e r i n g

过 去 式 f i l i b u s t e r e d

过 去 分 词 f i l i b u s t e r e d

英英释义

单词用法

同义词

反义词

例句

1.The senate allows for an unlimited debate in order to filibuster something, a bill, a vote, whatever.

参议院允许为了阻挠议事的一个法案，一次投票，不管是什么的无限争论。

2.Organizing or carry out of a filibuster.

为阻挠议事进行组织。

3.There is another, grimmer history to the filibuster , though, one that carries special relevance for me.

但是，对阻挠议事，还有一个冷酷的历史版本，跟我有特别的关联。

4.Senator Seymour has threatened a filibuster to block the bill.

西摩参议员威胁用长篇大论来阻挠该法案的通过。

5.In theory, Republicans could mount a filibuster, but blocking a judge is not like blocking a law.

理论上，共和党可以为这份名单设置障碍，但是，妨碍最高法官候选名单的通过并不像阻碍一项法律的通过。

6.In the Senate, Republicans have just enough votes to mount a filibuster and block bills.

参议院内共和党人票数刚好够动用阻挠议事程序，终止法案。

7.Originally senators had actually talk when they want a filibuster.

原来参议员实际上当在冗长演说的时候会进行谈话。

8.Getting to 60 votes, enough to defeat a filibuster, is still a tall order.

要想得到足够瓦解阻挠议事的60票仍是个苛求。

9.Us house representatives doesn't have a filibuster.

美国众议院代表们没有冗长演说。

10.The senator decided to use a filibuster to delay the vote on the controversial bill.

这位参议员决定使用冗长发言来延迟对这项有争议法案的投票。

11.During the debate, he launched into a lengthy filibuster that frustrated his opponents.

在辩论中，他展开了一场漫长的冗长发言，让他的对手感到沮丧。

12.The filibuster tactic is often used by minority parties to stall legislation.

少数党常常使用冗长发言策略来拖延立法进程。

13.She prepared a detailed speech for her filibuster to draw attention to the issue.

她为自己的冗长发言准备了一篇详细的演讲，以引起人们对这个问题的关注。

14.The House voted to eliminate the filibuster for judicial nominations.

众议院投票决定取消对司法提名的冗长发言。

作文

The concept of a filibuster is often discussed in the context of legislative processes, particularly in the United States Senate. A filibuster is a tactic used by senators to delay or block legislation by extending debate on the bill. This can be achieved through various means, such as giving long speeches or introducing numerous amendments. The primary goal of a filibuster is to prevent a vote from occurring, thereby stalling the legislative process. Historically, the filibuster has been a controversial tool in American politics. It allows a minority party to exert influence over the legislative agenda, which can be both a blessing and a curse. On one hand, it protects the rights of the minority and ensures that their voices are heard. On the other hand, it can lead to gridlock, where important legislation is stalled indefinitely due to prolonged debate. One of the most famous examples of a filibuster occurred in 1957 when Senator Strom Thurmond spoke for 24 hours and 18 minutes in an attempt to block the Civil Rights Act. His marathon speech is a testament to the lengths to which senators will go to utilize this tactic. While Thurmond's filibuster ultimately failed, it highlighted the power that individual senators can wield in the legislative process. In recent years, the use of the filibuster has sparked significant debate among lawmakers and political analysts. Some argue that it should be abolished altogether, as it often leads to inaction and prevents the government from functioning effectively. Others contend that it is a vital tool for protecting minority opinions and ensuring comprehensive debate on important issues. The rules governing the filibuster have also evolved over time. In 2013, Senate Democrats changed the rules to eliminate the filibuster for most presidential nominations, allowing them to be confirmed with a simple majority rather than the traditional supermajority. This change was met with mixed reactions, as some praised it for streamlining the nomination process, while others criticized it for undermining the checks and balances that the filibuster was designed to uphold. As we look to the future, the role of the filibuster in American politics remains uncertain. With increasing polarization in Congress, it is likely that the filibuster will continue to be a contentious issue. Some lawmakers may seek to reform or eliminate it entirely, while others will defend its existence as a crucial component of the legislative process. Regardless of its fate, the filibuster will undoubtedly remain a significant aspect of American democracy, representing the ongoing struggle between majority rule and minority rights. In conclusion, understanding the filibuster is essential for anyone interested in American politics. It is a complex tool that embodies the tensions inherent in a democratic system, balancing the need for decisive action with the necessity of protecting diverse viewpoints. As debates around the filibuster continue, it is crucial to consider its historical implications and the potential consequences of any changes to this legislative practice.

“阻挠投票”这一概念通常在立法过程中讨论，特别是在美国参议院。filibuster是一种由参议员使用的策略，通过延长对法案的辩论来延迟或阻止立法。这可以通过多种方式实现，例如发表长时间的演讲或引入众多修正案。filibuster的主要目标是防止进行投票，从而拖延立法过程。 历史上，filibuster一直是美国政治中一个有争议的工具。它允许少数党对立法议程施加影响，这既可以是福音，也可以是诅咒。一方面，它保护了少数派的权利，确保他们的声音被听到。另一方面，它可能导致僵局，使重要立法因持续辩论而无限期停滞。 1957年，参议员斯特罗姆·瑟蒙德（Strom Thurmond）发表了24小时18分钟的演讲，试图阻止《民权法案》，这是最著名的filibuster例子之一。他的马拉松式演讲证明了参议员们为利用这一策略所付出的努力。尽管瑟蒙德的filibuster最终失败，但它突显了单个参议员在立法过程中可以发挥的权力。 近年来，filibuster的使用在立法者和政治分析家之间引发了重大辩论。一些人认为它应该完全废除，因为它通常导致无所作为，阻碍政府有效运作。其他人则认为这是保护少数意见的重要工具，确保对重要问题进行全面辩论。 关于filibuster的规则也随着时间而演变。2013年，参议院民主党人修改规则，消除了大多数总统提名的filibuster，允许以简单多数而不是传统的超多数确认。这一变化引发了混合反应，一些人赞扬其简化了提名过程，而另一些人则批评其削弱了filibuster旨在维护的制衡。 展望未来，filibuster在美国政治中的角色仍不确定。随着国会两极分化的加剧，filibuster很可能继续成为一个有争议的问题。一些立法者可能寻求改革或完全消除它，而其他人将捍卫其作为立法过程关键组成部分的存在。无论其命运如何，filibuster无疑将继续是美国民主的重要方面，代表着多数统治与少数权利之间的持续斗争。 总之，理解filibuster对于任何对美国政治感兴趣的人来说都是至关重要的。这是一个复杂的工具，体现了民主制度固有的紧张关系，在需要果断行动与保护多元观点之间保持平衡。随着围绕filibuster的辩论持续进行，考虑其历史影响及任何对这一立法实践的变更潜在后果至关重要。