HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » Filibuster Reform Now Off...
Introducing Discussionist: A new forum by the creators of DU

Sat Nov 17, 2012, 10:38 AM

Filibuster Reform Now Official – Reid Presents New Filibuster Rule




This is the most important piece of legislation the Senate will debate all year.

If they don’t pass filibuster reform, we will simply have gridlock.

And the American people want governing.
‘To understand what is happening, you first need to understand the issue at hand’.

‘Right now, to pass a cloture measure, that is to close a bill to debate and then vote on it, you need 60 votes’.

‘In the past Senators wishing to block bills had to by debating endlessly. To address this, a rule was put into place in 1975 which allowed a 3/5 majority of senators sworn in to end debate’.

‘It rarely caused issues, until recently when the GOP began invoking the rule of cloture on every single piece of legislation, but then did not stand up to debate’.

‘In other words, they abused the rule intended to stop endless debate without actually debating’.

‘They would force a cloture vote, but there would be no debate for which to invoke cloture at all.

‘In 2011, when the new Senate was convened, Senator Reid met with the Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell and made a deal to limit the abuse of the filibuster in the new session’.

‘The handshake deal lasted for 40 days, with Senator Hutchinson of Texas invoking the rule on February 15′.

‘After that, 108 more cloture motions were filed, and of those 109, 70 had the majority vote. In the end, only 38 passed cloture and the bills voted’.

‘So much for the handshake deal’.

‘After Mitch McConnell lied to Harry Reid’s face, violating the agreement, the Senate Majority Leader will use the transition in January to the next congress as an opportunity to fix the rules so blatantly abused by the Republicans’.





‘The new rule would change this simple bit. When the rule of cloture is invoked, a vote is taken on the measure and should it not pass a simple majority, the bill is killed. If, however, a Senator invokes the rule of cloture, and when the vote is taken it does not pass on the 3/5′s majority, but does on simple majority, the floor is immediately opened up for debate. Four calls for debate will go out, and if nobody steps up to debate, the cloture would be voted on again, this time only needing a simple majority to pass’.



Some are calling this the Mr. Smith rule, after the classic movie Mr. Smith Goes to Washington starring James Stewart. This simple rule change, the tying of cloture to the debate, is one long needed in Washington. As a result, now if a minority party wishes to block a measure, they will have to go on the record as being against it, with footage of it. Now they just can go “no cloture” and can avoid the political fallout of things like blocking the jobs act or stimulus bill.



To remind people what a filibuster properly is, below is an example of a true filibuster, at 8 hours, 34 minutes, Senator Bernie Sanders took to the floor on December 10th, 2010, to filibuster the tax-cut extension deal. This is what a filibuster will mean now, not the farce it has become:



http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/SandersF








http://thelastofthemillenniums.wordpress.com/2012/11/17/what-congress-does-filibuster-reform-now-official-reid-presents-new-filibuster-rule/

85 replies, 12309 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 85 replies Author Time Post
Reply Filibuster Reform Now Official – Reid Presents New Filibuster Rule (Original post)
Segami Nov 2012 OP
Angry Dragon Nov 2012 #1
haikugal Nov 2012 #2
struggle4progress Nov 2012 #3
Spazito Nov 2012 #4
rhett o rick Nov 2012 #6
Spazito Nov 2012 #8
rhett o rick Nov 2012 #31
INdemo Nov 2012 #33
rhett o rick Nov 2012 #40
Honeycombe8 Nov 2012 #68
bjobotts Nov 2012 #76
KharmaTrain Nov 2012 #5
Segami Nov 2012 #10
coalition_unwilling Nov 2012 #24
Spazito Nov 2012 #38
coalition_unwilling Nov 2012 #39
theKed Nov 2012 #59
Zorra Nov 2012 #60
aquart Nov 2012 #78
Tx4obama Nov 2012 #80
2naSalit Nov 2012 #41
lobodons Nov 2012 #19
Zorra Nov 2012 #34
The Magistrate Nov 2012 #7
byeya Nov 2012 #9
julian09 Nov 2012 #58
AZ Mike Nov 2012 #11
Fumesucker Nov 2012 #20
eqfan592 Nov 2012 #22
littlewolf Nov 2012 #56
Tx4obama Nov 2012 #71
Volaris Nov 2012 #84
ReallyIAmAnOptimist Nov 2012 #12
Spazito Nov 2012 #16
CitizenPatriot Nov 2012 #21
Spazito Nov 2012 #27
former9thward Nov 2012 #44
Spazito Nov 2012 #45
former9thward Nov 2012 #47
Tx4obama Nov 2012 #72
Tx4obama Nov 2012 #82
Tx4obama Nov 2012 #81
Tx4obama Nov 2012 #73
hootinholler Nov 2012 #13
krispos42 Nov 2012 #14
kentuck Nov 2012 #15
smokey nj Nov 2012 #17
upi402 Nov 2012 #18
Comrade_McKenzie Nov 2012 #23
Warren Stupidity Nov 2012 #61
nadinbrzezinski Nov 2012 #25
mick063 Nov 2012 #26
graham4anything Nov 2012 #28
Tx4obama Nov 2012 #77
patrice Nov 2012 #29
Change has come Nov 2012 #30
AnotherMcIntosh Nov 2012 #32
barnabas63 Nov 2012 #36
cleanhippie Nov 2012 #35
On the Road Nov 2012 #37
Gregorian Nov 2012 #42
valerief Nov 2012 #43
Hulk Nov 2012 #46
grantcart Nov 2012 #48
Tx4obama Nov 2012 #74
grantcart Nov 2012 #83
The Wizard Nov 2012 #49
Coyotl Nov 2012 #50
ProudProgressiveNow Nov 2012 #51
HopeHoops Nov 2012 #52
rock Nov 2012 #53
DallasNE Nov 2012 #54
UCmeNdc Nov 2012 #55
PoliticAverse Nov 2012 #57
ProgressiveEconomist Nov 2012 #64
Tx4obama Nov 2012 #75
hrmjustin Nov 2012 #62
ProgressiveEconomist Nov 2012 #63
libodem Nov 2012 #65
MrModerate Nov 2012 #66
GeorgeGist Nov 2012 #67
Tx4obama Nov 2012 #69
Tx4obama Nov 2012 #70
southerncrone Nov 2012 #79
aandegoons Nov 2012 #85

Response to Segami (Original post)

Sat Nov 17, 2012, 10:43 AM

1. Good

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Segami (Original post)

Sat Nov 17, 2012, 10:56 AM

2. Good...will it pass?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to haikugal (Reply #2)

Sat Nov 17, 2012, 11:04 AM

3. That's an important question

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to haikugal (Reply #2)

Sat Nov 17, 2012, 11:09 AM

4. I believe it only takes a simple majority for it to pass...

because it relates to the rules governing the Senate and is debated at the beginning of a new Congress and, if so, yes, it should pass.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Spazito (Reply #4)

Sat Nov 17, 2012, 11:16 AM

6. But which way will Sen Lieberman vote? Oh yeah, he is gonzo. Yea! nm

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rhett o rick (Reply #6)

Sat Nov 17, 2012, 11:18 AM

8. Yep, he's gone and there are more Democrats in the Senate come January...

it's looking very good for a filibuster reform vote being successful.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Spazito (Reply #8)

Sat Nov 17, 2012, 12:07 PM

31. And importantly, more progressive Democrats. nm

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rhett o rick (Reply #6)

Sat Nov 17, 2012, 12:12 PM

33. I assumed Reid would bring this to a vote after Jan 1 when

the new Senators were installed..?? I think the rule change must be voted on within a certain amount of days after the new Congress starts its session...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to INdemo (Reply #33)

Sat Nov 17, 2012, 12:39 PM

40. I also think that is the case. nm

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to INdemo (Reply #33)

Sat Nov 17, 2012, 11:03 PM

68. Yes, the article says he'll do this in January...

"the Senate Majority Leader will use the transition in January to the next congress as an opportunity to fix the rules so blatantly abused by the Republicans’."

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to INdemo (Reply #33)

Sun Nov 18, 2012, 01:15 AM

76. But if debate occurs will simple majority pass it

I mean if it is a filibuster and debate occurs... after four calls for debate will the vote finally be taken and passed by a simple majority of 51? or will the filibuster continue. Also will there be limits on how many filibusters are allowed per session?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to haikugal (Reply #2)

Sat Nov 17, 2012, 11:12 AM

5. 51 Votes Take It...

...there are 53 Democrats and 2 Independents (who caucus with Democrats). The only Democrats I can see voting against this would be Manchin and maybe Donnelly...but I think even they'll go along with this rule change. I feel confident that after all the abuse of the filibuster by the rushpublicans over the past 6 years, this measure should pass and maybe the Senate can have a real function again...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to haikugal (Reply #2)

Sat Nov 17, 2012, 11:21 AM

10. " The filibuster could be changed by majority vote, but only on the 1st day of the session"

Senate rules permit a senator, or a series of senators, to speak for as long as they wish and on any topic they choose, unless "three-fifths of the Senators duly chosen and sworn" (usually 60 out of 100 senators) brings debate to a close by invoking cloture under Senate Rule XXII. According to the Supreme Court ruling in United States v. Ballin (1892), changes to Senate rules could be achieved by a simple majority, but only on the 1st day of the session in January or March. Nevertheless, under current Senate rules, a rule change itself could be filibustered, with two-thirds of those senators present and voting (as opposed to the normal three-fifths of those sworn) needing to vote to break the filibuster. Despite this written requirement, the possibility exists that the filibuster could be changed by majority vote, but only on the 1st day of the session in January or March, using the so-called nuclear option, also sometimes called the constitutional option by proponents. Even if a filibuster attempt is unsuccessful, the process takes floor time.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Filibuster

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Segami (Reply #10)

Sat Nov 17, 2012, 11:54 AM

24. "Under current Senate rules, a rule change itself could be

 

filibustered" - I don't think a simple majority will cut it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to coalition_unwilling (Reply #24)

Sat Nov 17, 2012, 12:34 PM

38. The debate will hinge on the "Constitutional Option" first argued by ...

Senator Walsh and Senator Henry Cabot Lodge in 1917. It is a fascinating read as to the argument based on the Constitution, Article 1, Section 5, which allows each branch of Congress to make it's own rules. Here is a snippet of the argument put forward:

“When the Constitution says that ‘Each House may determine its rules of proceeding,’ it means that
each House may, by a majority vote, a quorum being present, determine its rules.”

Walsh reasoned that just as the House could adopt new rules at any time by a simple majority vote, even in the face of a contrary House rule requiring “‘that two-thirds or any larger number alone shall make changes", under Article I, Section 5, so could the Senate.


Furthermore, Walsh explained, just as the rules of the House expire with the Congress in which they were adopted, so do the rules of the Senate. Walsh noted that at the start of each session the House has no
rules until it, while operating under general parliamentary procedures, adopts new rules or re-adopts the prior rules. Similarly, he concluded, the Senate has no rules until it adopts new rules or re-adopts the prior
rules, whether explicitly by a vote or implicitly by operating under them and thus acquiescing to them.

http://faculty.washington.edu/jwilker/353/353Assignments/Gold_Gupta_JLPP_article.pdf

The discussion on the "Constitution Option" begins on page 217 (pdf numbering). That whole pdf starts on page 206 so scrolling down to 217 isn't as onerous as it might appear.

It really is fascinating reading, imo.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Spazito (Reply #38)

Sat Nov 17, 2012, 12:38 PM

39. Thanks. Bookmarking for later study - n/t

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Spazito (Reply #38)

Sat Nov 17, 2012, 02:06 PM

59. marking this for a read

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to coalition_unwilling (Reply #24)

Sat Nov 17, 2012, 02:15 PM

60. HOW TO END THE FILIBUSTER FOREVER

How To End the Filibuster Forever

The Senate can kill the rule any time! And with only 51 votes.
By Akhil Reed Amar and Gary Hart
Posted Thursday, Jan. 6, 2011, at 2:11 PM ET

Is the Senate like Cinderella—does it have the power to transform itself in only one limited moment, at the opening of the new Congress? That is one of the two big questions in the filibuster-reform debate that is now taking center stage in the United States Senate. The other is whether the Senate can change the filibuster rule by a simple majority vote, regardless of what the rule itself seems to say. The short answers to these questions are that there are no magic moments in the Senate and no need to muster 60 votes to repeal the filibuster rule. The upper house has the clear constitutional authority to end the filibuster by simple majority vote on any day it chooses.

Let's address the timing question first. Magical things happen to Cinderella when the clock strikes 12. According to the editorial board of the New York Times and other commentators, the moment every other year in January when the old Congress ends and a new one begins is similarly special. The idea is that only at this moment may a simple majority of the Senate lawfully modify the filibuster rules that in recent years have effectively required 60 votes for any important action in the upper house.

The Times and others are right about the power of the simple majority—more about why in a minute—but wrong about the Cinderella power of the Senate's opening day. A simple majority of determined senators may lawfully change the filibuster rules, even if the existing Senate rules say otherwise, at any time.


Good read, there's more.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Zorra (Reply #60)

Sun Nov 18, 2012, 01:16 AM

78. We don't want to end it. We want to make it extraordinary.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Zorra (Reply #60)

Sun Nov 18, 2012, 01:38 AM

80. Here is a current article with some details ...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Segami (Reply #10)

Sat Nov 17, 2012, 12:41 PM

41. Watch this

Ms. Maddow does it again with top notch journalism:


http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26315908/#49862782

Should 'splain it real good.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to haikugal (Reply #2)

Sat Nov 17, 2012, 11:48 AM

19. Whip

Reid surely has Whipped this in his Caucus to have made this so public and formal. Don't forget Macaskill and Heidkamp. (only that they are in Red states so could be tough votes to get) They makes 4 possible NO's. Can only have 5. Good thing we picked up 2 seats in election!!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to haikugal (Reply #2)

Sat Nov 17, 2012, 12:14 PM

34. If not, it will be the corporatist Third Way GOP allies who prevent it from passing. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Segami (Original post)

Sat Nov 17, 2012, 11:17 AM

7. Looks Pretty Good, Sir

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Segami (Original post)

Sat Nov 17, 2012, 11:18 AM

9. So even Harry Reid doesn't like being lied to. I have to tip my hat to him for running the Senate

 

in the face of perfidy from the RepubliKKKans while keeping it to himself. Fitting a Texas Senator had no ethics; I am not surprised at that.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to byeya (Reply #9)

Sat Nov 17, 2012, 02:05 PM

58. The hag from texas won't be there this time.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Segami (Original post)

Sat Nov 17, 2012, 11:23 AM

11. Just know....

That this will enhance Boehner's power immensely. I don't particularly care about that, per se, but we can pass all the bills out of the Senate that we want - they won't pass in the House if they are never brought to the floor for a vote. Boehner is a one-man cloture now.

Of course, the flipside is that it could end up making Boehner feel like an ant under a magnifying glass on a sunny day. It increases his power, but it also increases his pressure....

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AZ Mike (Reply #11)

Sat Nov 17, 2012, 11:50 AM

20. Well, Orange John already *looks* like an ant under a magnifying glass on a sunny day

So there's that.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AZ Mike (Reply #11)

Sat Nov 17, 2012, 11:52 AM

22. Well yes and no.

Because it will FORCE Boehner and house republicans to both speak out and vote against bills that otherwise would never have made it there (like the vet jobs bill). Basically, they've gotten away with quietly torpedoing a lot of otherwise popular legislation, and this should put a stop to that.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to eqfan592 (Reply #22)

Sat Nov 17, 2012, 01:46 PM

56. I don't see how it can force boner to do anything.

if the Senate bill never makes it to the floor of the house
meaning it died in committee they house will not vote on it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AZ Mike (Reply #11)

Sun Nov 18, 2012, 01:03 AM

71. There are things The Senate votes on that The House doesn't: Supreme Court Justices...


Federal Appellate Court Judges, Federal District Court Judges, Administration Appointments, etc.

If the new filibuster reform rule goes into effect then the GOPers in the senate won't be able to block those anymore like they have been the past few years.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AZ Mike (Reply #11)

Sun Nov 18, 2012, 04:56 AM

84. I concede your point that "it turns The Speaker into a one-man cloture",

but the other side of that, is that it's a HELL of a lot easier for the President to threaten a House with a 2-year term limit from that big-ass bully pulpit he has than it would be to do the same to a Senate that serves for 6 years. The GOP-Majority House can be "bribed", essentially, member by member, to get a particular bill passed. It takes more nickle-and-dime-type dealmaking than it ever would in the Senate, but if need be, the House CAN be "legislativley bought", by a President who knows what the hell he's doing--though it well help IMMENSLY if Boehner is on board with a tentative deal in the first place, and as an example of how to DO exactly this kind of thing, see LBJ (who basically said "I'll buy your district whatever you WANT me to buy it, but for that to happen, you have to vote yes on the Bill I want passed. If you don't LIKE the first option, the second is that (in political terms at least) I just come to you house and break your legs with a bat.)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Segami (Original post)

Sat Nov 17, 2012, 11:28 AM

12. This is a blog. I see NOTHING in the MSM on Reid actually doing anything (yet).

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ReallyIAmAnOptimist (Reply #12)

Sat Nov 17, 2012, 11:39 AM

16. Here is Senator Reid's own words on it...

"In his first press conference since the election, Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., said that the Senate will be taking up filibuster reform this session.

The Huffington Post reports that although Reid didn’t say he would get rid of the filibuster entirely, he emphasized that new reforms would make it more difficult for Republicans to be as obstructionist as they have been. ”I have said so publicly, and I continue to feel that way … I think the rules have been abused, and we are going to work to change them,” he said. “We will not do away with the filibuster, but we will make the Senate a more meaningful place. We are going to make it so we can get things done.”"

http://www.salon.com/2012/11/09/harry_reid_senate_will_pursue_filibuster_reform/

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Spazito (Reply #16)

Sat Nov 17, 2012, 11:52 AM

21. But nowhere else does it say

what his new plan is specifically.

This isn't the first time Addicting Info made up a story. Just days ago they had a story about Obama getting Iran to stop making nuclear weapons that was taken off the front page here after it was shown to be made up news.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to CitizenPatriot (Reply #21)

Sat Nov 17, 2012, 12:00 PM

27. There will be reform, that is what Senator Reid has stated...

it has been reported in the mainstream media. Here is more info showing Reid supports the reform mentioned in the OP:

"The devil may be in the details. Reid has said he wouldn’t scrap the filibuster entirely, but would support getting rid of filibusters on the “motion to proceed,” meaning you’d no longer need 60 votes just to debate a bill. Udall and others last year introduced a measure that, among other steps, would have raised the political costs of filibustering by requiring the minority to actually hold the floor and debate, rather than simply notifying the majority of their intention to filibuster.

Reid opposed that measure, but in May, frustrated by the lastest GOP filibuster, he said he’d changed his mind.
“These two young, fine senators said it was time to change the rules of the Senate and we didn’t,” Reid said on the Senate floor, referring to Udall and Jeff Merkley of Oregon. “They were right. The rest of us were wrong—or most of us, anyway. What a shame.”"

http://tv.msnbc.com/2012/11/13/filibuster-reform-could-actually-happen/

Note that Senator Reid made specific mention of the Udall measure which is the one to actually hold the floor and debate.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Spazito (Reply #27)

Sat Nov 17, 2012, 12:53 PM

44. Again, absolutely nothing specific.

Mentioning someone else is not proposal.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to former9thward (Reply #44)

Sat Nov 17, 2012, 12:55 PM

45. Ahhh, so saying there will be reform and showcasing the Udall measure....

means nothing, got it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Spazito (Reply #45)

Sat Nov 17, 2012, 12:56 PM

47. I doubt you do....

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Spazito (Reply #45)

Sun Nov 18, 2012, 01:05 AM

72. It is the Merkley package that is being considered. See article link below

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to former9thward (Reply #44)

Sun Nov 18, 2012, 01:41 AM

82. Here is a link to the 'newest' news about The Senate filibuster reform


Here: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/11/15/democrats-filibuster-reform_n_2141382.html

NO final details regarding the new rule have been released yet.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to CitizenPatriot (Reply #21)

Sun Nov 18, 2012, 01:40 AM

81. Here is a link with the newest news ...


Here: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/11/15/democrats-filibuster-reform_n_2141382.html

NO final details regarding the new rule have been released yet.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ReallyIAmAnOptimist (Reply #12)

Sun Nov 18, 2012, 01:07 AM

73. The newest news is on the link below

Last edited Sun Nov 18, 2012, 01:46 AM - Edit history (1)


Here: here: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/11/15/democrats-filibuster-reform_n_2141382.html

No definite details yet, but they are talking about the package that Merkley has put together.



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Segami (Original post)

Sat Nov 17, 2012, 11:33 AM

13. Good! This does not end the fillibuster

But requires a commitment to it to invoke it. This is very reasonable and preserves the minority's ability to prevent very bad legislation.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Segami (Original post)

Sat Nov 17, 2012, 11:36 AM

14. Rec!

n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Segami (Original post)

Sat Nov 17, 2012, 11:38 AM

15. Sounds great !!

That is a big step forward.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Segami (Original post)

Sat Nov 17, 2012, 11:41 AM

17. Just think how different things would have been if Harry'd done this in 2009.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Segami (Original post)

Sat Nov 17, 2012, 11:46 AM

18. Republicans do it since they now just file a paper and don't stand speaking for hours

Reform this abuse that shuts down job creating legislation!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Segami (Original post)

Sat Nov 17, 2012, 11:53 AM

23. Too half-assed. Simple majority vote should be what passes.

 

No matter the party in power.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Comrade_McKenzie (Reply #23)

Sat Nov 17, 2012, 02:23 PM

61. I agree.

Even though we risk empowering either party if they control both houses, it is worth the risk. The logjam has gone on long enough.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Segami (Original post)

Sat Nov 17, 2012, 11:55 AM

25. And here, from my corner, I am bringing out the pom poms

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Segami (Original post)

Sat Nov 17, 2012, 11:59 AM

26. We will still have grid lock,

 

but this is still very important legislation (perhaps rule change is more accurate?).

It will put the obstructionist label directly on the House instead of all of Congress. The Democratic Senate is too often lumped together with the House when it comes to the "do nothing" label.


We may not get more accomplished than before, but it does change the discussion which is very, very important. Perhaps the approval rating numbers will reflect more accurately when further defined.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Segami (Original post)

Sat Nov 17, 2012, 12:00 PM

28. Did Harry Reid actually say this today or yesterday?

 

or is this what they want Harry to do?

I read something similiar but it was a what if type.

and what stops the repubs from fillibustering this stop the filibuster rule?
(sounds like an old get smart routine)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to graham4anything (Reply #28)

Sun Nov 18, 2012, 01:16 AM

77. The 'newest' info is on the link below


Here's the newest info: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/11/15/democrats-filibuster-reform_n_2141382.html

Senator Reid has not yet stated with the new rule will be.




Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Segami (Original post)

Sat Nov 17, 2012, 12:02 PM

29. Solidarity with all who FIGHT Congress!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Segami (Original post)

Sat Nov 17, 2012, 12:07 PM

30. K & R

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Segami (Original post)

Sat Nov 17, 2012, 12:09 PM

32. So, on Dec 10, 2010, Sen Sanders filibustered the tax-cut extension deal for 8 hrs, 34 minutes.

 

Let's hope that any filibuster deal will not prevent him from doing so again.

If Sen. Reid cannot obtain filibuster reform or if he will not actually do so (I'll believe filibuster reform when I see it), one or more Democratic Senators should regularly hold daily news conferences to point out that the Republicans are obstructing the business of the Senate.

The so-called filibusters should be front-page news.

For anyone who wants to celebrate filibuster reform, and I am among those who do, let's see it first.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AnotherMcIntosh (Reply #32)

Sat Nov 17, 2012, 12:14 PM

36. Yeah, me too. I'll believe it when I see it.

Hopeful but not giddy yet.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Segami (Original post)

Sat Nov 17, 2012, 12:14 PM

35. Exellent. Make them stand there and defend their actions.

On the record.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Segami (Original post)

Sat Nov 17, 2012, 12:21 PM

37. This is a Better Development Than Invoking the Nuclear Option

Tying it to further debate sounds like a great idea.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Segami (Original post)

Sat Nov 17, 2012, 12:43 PM

42. I'll believe it when I see it.



They will be thinking about what happens if we aren't in the majority in 2014.

They should pass it under any circumstance. Let's hope they have the sense to do so.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Segami (Original post)

Sat Nov 17, 2012, 12:50 PM

43. I hope it passes, but I wouldn't put money on it. It's the U.S. Congress, after all. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Segami (Original post)

Sat Nov 17, 2012, 12:55 PM

46. So, how are they going to change the rule??...with 60 votes? or a simple majority?

I'm a bit confused. Will they be able to make this change without climbing the repube barrier of a fillibuster? If Ried is able to simply make the change, GREAT! If it is something that has to be voted on by the full Senate, I don't see it passing.

Straighten me out, will ya!?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Segami (Original post)

Sat Nov 17, 2012, 12:58 PM

48. How is this 'official'? Are you saying that Reid has endorsed this approach?


Seems just another blog with their own ideas.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to grantcart (Reply #48)

Sun Nov 18, 2012, 01:09 AM

74. It is the Merkley package that is being considered. See article link below

Last edited Sun Nov 18, 2012, 01:42 AM - Edit history (1)


Here: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/11/15/democrats-filibuster-reform_n_2141382.html

NO final details regarding the new rule have been released yet.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Tx4obama (Reply #74)

Sun Nov 18, 2012, 01:47 AM

83. thanks

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Segami (Original post)

Sat Nov 17, 2012, 12:58 PM

49. There are no real filibusters, just threats

Make those who say they'll filibuster actually put on an adult diaper and keep talking until they drop. The real abuse lies in the fact that no on really filibusters as it was intended.
I want to see Lindsey Graham recite the Manhattan phone book on the Senate floor. I want to see John McCain talk until his incontinence can no longer be hidden.
Can anyone name a normal Republican? The Republican Party has become a prevaricating death cult.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Segami (Original post)

Sat Nov 17, 2012, 01:05 PM

50. great graphic

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Segami (Original post)

Sat Nov 17, 2012, 01:05 PM

51. K&R nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Segami (Original post)

Sat Nov 17, 2012, 01:08 PM

52. It's an excellent start, but I'd like to see the filibuster killed entirely.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Segami (Original post)

Sat Nov 17, 2012, 01:12 PM

53. "Handshake deal"! With a senator!?

Don't make me guffaw! (Too late )

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Segami (Original post)

Sat Nov 17, 2012, 01:17 PM

54. As I Recall

Republicans controlled the Senate leadership in 2001 with a 50-50 tie with Cheney casting the deciding vote yet Republicans used the filibuster? How many times did Democrats filibuster in 2001?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Segami (Original post)

Sat Nov 17, 2012, 01:32 PM

55. Very Good!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Segami (Original post)

Sat Nov 17, 2012, 01:46 PM

57. There is nothing new here in this blog post, just a rehash of comments/proposals made recently.

No final official filibuster reform bill.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to PoliticAverse (Reply #57)

Sat Nov 17, 2012, 08:03 PM

64. Did you miss the 3rd from last paragraph in the OP? Sounds like a plan to me--

"‘The new rule would change this simple bit. When the rule of cloture is invoked, a vote is taken on the measure and should it not pass a simple majority, the bill is killed. If, however, a Senator invokes the rule of cloture, and when the vote is taken it does not pass on the 3/5′s majority, but does on simple majority, the floor is immediately opened up for debate. Four calls for debate will go out, and if nobody steps up to debate, the cloture would be voted on again, this time only needing a simple majority to pass'".

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProgressiveEconomist (Reply #64)

Sun Nov 18, 2012, 01:11 AM

75. Senators have NOT been talking about what is in the OP. See the Merkley package on link below

Last edited Sun Nov 18, 2012, 02:05 AM - Edit history (2)


Here: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/11/15/democrats-filibuster-reform_n_2141382.html

Senator Reid has NOT released any details yet of what the rule change will be.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Segami (Original post)

Sat Nov 17, 2012, 05:42 PM

62. seems good to me!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Segami (Original post)

Sat Nov 17, 2012, 06:15 PM

63. BRILLIANT! Reid's proposed rule would virtually eliminate one of TWO filibusters to which every

bill now is subject--the one Republicans have been abusing almost exclusively--filibustering the motion to proceed to debate.

Until now, everyone's attention has been focused on the more familiar filibuster Republicans have NOT been using so far, the one that can take place after the motion to proceed to debate has been approved.

Now Republicans who want to filibuster will have to go on record in debate against jobs for veterans, against infrastructure repair, etc.

I've already turned this post into its own thread at http://www.democraticunderground.com/1251250243 .

From pdf page 2 of http://www.senate.gov/CRSReports/crs-publish.cfm?pid='0E%2C*PLW%3D%22P%20%20%0A :

"Filibusters and Cloture in the Senate. Congressional Research Service, February 2011

Almost every bill... is potentially subject to two filibusters before the Senate votes on whether to pass it: first, a filibuster on a motion to proceed to the bill’s consideration; and second, after the Senate agrees to this motion, a filibuster on the bill itself."

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Segami (Original post)

Sat Nov 17, 2012, 08:44 PM

65. BROVO

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Segami (Original post)

Sat Nov 17, 2012, 09:59 PM

66. Some Dems have said "don't do this" . . .

Because when we're in the minority again — as Dems inevitably will be some day — we'll wish we still had the ability to prevent the majority from imposing its will.

However, that's faulty thinking, IMO. The abuse of the rule is much worse than the legislative outcomes that might eventuate if it's changed. This is because in the absence of sincere debate, not only are differences never actually hammered out, but also because such a cynical process generates intense contempt for the Senate (and government as a whole) — which makes governance in general that much harder.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Segami (Original post)

Sat Nov 17, 2012, 10:32 PM

67. Seeing is believing.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Segami (Original post)

Sun Nov 18, 2012, 12:53 AM

69. Senator Reid has NOT yet released details of the new filibuster reform rule

Last edited Sun Nov 18, 2012, 02:10 AM - Edit history (1)




Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Segami (Original post)

Sun Nov 18, 2012, 12:58 AM

70. The 2nd link in the OP and The Addicting Info link end up at yesterday's HuffPo article below link

Last edited Sun Nov 18, 2012, 01:46 AM - Edit history (1)


Here: here: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/11/15/democrats-filibuster-reform_n_2141382.html

There is NOTHING in the article on the link above that says the stuff that the OP says about the new rule.



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Segami (Original post)

Sun Nov 18, 2012, 01:21 AM

79. Probably the best thing to happen to regain a "functioning" government.

the Repubs slimy ways are backfiring on them. The American people are watching & seeing WHO were the obstructionists. Serves them right!



But for the life of me, I still don't understand what Harry Reid was thinking in 2008.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Segami (Original post)

Sun Nov 18, 2012, 08:13 AM

85. One can only hope.

There is so much wrong with out government right now. I think this situation is like taking an aspirin for a heart attack.

The real issue here is getting money out of the government. I believe that we have legalized bribery in our government at that is one of the real issues among many which contribute to this situation.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread