We understand why filibusters exist. But sometimes, the use of them is just puzzling.

Such is the case with Sens. Chuck Purgason, R-Caulfield, and Jason Crowell, R-Cape Girardeau. The two senators from Southeast Missouri took exception to a bill dealing with classroom construction at Missouri’s public universities.

The bill, if passed, would place a $700 million bond issue up for statewide election. That money would finance campus construction at Missouri’s public colleges and universities.

Purgason and Crowell ended up filibustering an amendment to the bill that would have guaranteed at least $81 million to the University of Missouri system and $91 million for Missouri State University.

The puzzling part of the filibuster is that the bill seemed to have overwhelming support.

Rep. Chris Kelly, D-Columbia, said he had support from 25 of Missouri’s 34 senators, including several Republicans. The bill passed Missouri’s tight-fisted House, and it’s easy to see why: The bill lets voters decide whether the state should keep making a payment it’s already making, and proposes a way to beef up our universities without finding new money.

But in a report from The Columbia Missourian, Purgason said that state government shouldn’t be growing.

“We’ve continued to experience negative growth,” Purgason said. “Right now, continuing to spend money and take on debt is not how we are going to get out of this downturn.”

Last we checked, it takes workers to build classrooms. Such buildings are major projects that employ many and churn money through local economies. In other words, this bill could create jobs.

Add to that how Missourians would make the ultimate decision, and it makes the filibuster look even more puzzling.

We don’t buy Purgason’s reasons for filibustering this bill. We hope that the Senate can divine the real reasons for opposition and work out a compromise before the legislative session ends.