Nuclear Option VS Filibuster During recent events a new problem has arisen. The Republicans have been debating against the Democrats on whether or not to use nuclear option to counter filibusters. Nuclear option, which is the changing of Senate, rules to allow judicial and executive nominees to be confirmed with just 51 votes instead of 60 is strongly supported be the Senate. Filibuster on the other hand is, the process where debate is extended, the House supports allowing members to delay or entirely prevent a vote on a given proposal. I believe that the nuclear option is wrong. I believe this because I see the nuclear option as something that could reduce productivity by causing less work and more arguing. An example would be when the Republicans decide to prolong a bill by using filibuster. Since the Democrats have more seats in the house, and the fact that filibuster is a disliked technique, the Democrats will attempt to end the filibuster. Since the Democrats only have 55 members, the Democrats want to reduce the amount of votes to end a filibuster from 60 out of 100 to 51 out of 100 members. And another thing to add on to this problem, now that it only takes majority rule to pass this, the Democrats win and filibuster ends. However, later on the Republicans may become majority party again, therefore possibly causing the Democrats to regret their decision. Both parties will have disagreements and decreased productivity. From the video on YouTube about the nuclear option, I can believe that the nuclear option is more than ending filibuster. I think it’s a nuke being used to attack the other party. I see this in the videos is because on both videos with MSNBC and Fox news, which they are, biased news agencies.