HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » Politics 2014 (Forum) » Okay, Harry Reid. Change ...

Wed Jan 2, 2013, 01:26 PM

Okay, Harry Reid. Change the filibuster rules!

20 replies, 2371 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 20 replies Author Time Post
Reply Okay, Harry Reid. Change the filibuster rules! (Original post)
The Wielding Truth Jan 2013 OP
musiclawyer Jan 2013 #1
The Wielding Truth Jan 2013 #3
Igel Jan 2013 #9
99th_Monkey Jan 2013 #11
brooklynite Jan 2013 #7
xxxsdesdexxx Jan 2013 #2
The Wielding Truth Jan 2013 #5
99th_Monkey Jan 2013 #12
UCmeNdc Jan 2013 #4
The Wielding Truth Jan 2013 #6
BlueCaliDem Jan 2013 #16
Filibuster Harry Jan 2013 #8
mtasselin Jan 2013 #10
ReRe Jan 2013 #13
Liberalynn Jan 2013 #14
saidsimplesimon Jan 2013 #15
Mass Jan 2013 #17
Pryderi Jan 2013 #19
riqster Jan 2013 #18
Liberal_Stalwart71 Jan 2013 #20

Response to The Wielding Truth (Original post)

Wed Jan 2, 2013, 01:36 PM

1. We find out this week if Dems want power

The watered down "bipartisan" plan is crap and we all know it

If Reid caves because of some Dino pressure then he is unfit to lead

If we get real reform, our chances of getting back the house or getting very close go up exponentially

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to musiclawyer (Reply #1)

Wed Jan 2, 2013, 01:46 PM

3. It seems to be a good way to get the country moving in the right direction, to make the filibuster

accountable and hold the challenger responsible to present their obstructive case, at the very least. Harry Reid better move on this as soon as he can.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to The Wielding Truth (Reply #3)

Wed Jan 2, 2013, 02:15 PM

9. There are different types of filibusters.

They're both "holds," really, since nobody actually filibusters anymore.

The first is notice of intent to filibuster. One Senator can make the claim, and often it's just a handful of opponents. Often nobody calls the bluff. In many cases, the senate leader doesn't try. Not worth the hassle to go and see if you have the votes to win a cloture vote for some petty bill.

The second is more worthwhile, and it's a hold pending more information. You put down a hold and say that there'll be questions forthcoming. Usually they are. Often the questions aren't answered. The person introducing knows that there's a majority and why bother showing the respect to a colleague and answer his question? But often the questions are long, ambiguous, or complicated. Sometimes they're serious questions. Sometimes they're intended to slow things down. And sometimes they're intended to put stuff on the record in a way that nobody wants leaked. After all, it's not unknown for something that everybody thinks they need short-term to have a bad effect long-term and only have a few reporters notice it.


But the parlamentarian in me doesn't like quashing the right to filibuster. It's a stark, sharp move towards majoritarianism, something that's always a bad idea. You can have a democratic majoritarian system. You can have a Democratic majoritarian system. But you cannot have a liberal democracy with a majoritarian system. We recognize this and even have no trouble denouncing Morsi for it in Egypt. But too many lust for such a system in the US. For now. Like Morsi, confident that the last vote is forever.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Igel (Reply #9)

Wed Jan 2, 2013, 03:10 PM

11. There is no good excuse for the current Senate "filibuster" rule

Last edited Wed Jan 2, 2013, 04:02 PM - Edit history (1)

It has produced unprecedented, legendary, and unnecessary legislative logjams in DC,
thanks to the Tea Party extremists in particular, but endemic to the Senate's paralysis
and dysfunction of late.

I hope you are not trying to defend the current system, where one member (or a few)
can simply make a phone call to kill a bill anonymously, without public scrutiny, and
without any accountability for their actions.

What, pray tell, is wrong with the classic "Mr. Smith goes to Washington" type of filibuster?
Are you opposed to that? I couldn't quite tell from this post.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to musiclawyer (Reply #1)

Wed Jan 2, 2013, 02:08 PM

7. Has nothing to do with "pressure"

Has to do with whether he can find 51 votes for a more acceptable reform package.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to The Wielding Truth (Original post)

Wed Jan 2, 2013, 01:43 PM

2. This happens tomorrow January 3rd right? Contact your members of congress

Let them know you want the "talking" filibuster and not the alternative bipartisan nonsense that McCain wants.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to xxxsdesdexxx (Reply #2)

Wed Jan 2, 2013, 01:58 PM

5. Democrats on Jan. 3 would have to pull what supporters call the “constitutional option”

This is a slanted article but it shows that it can be done.

http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/12/28/lawmakers-suggest-new-rules-to-speed-up-senate-business/“What we’re proposing on a bipartisan basis is a way to end the major sources of gridlock around here,” said Senator Carl Levin, Democrat of Michigan, who, along with Senator John McCain, Republican of Arizona, unveiled the plan.

It is not clear whether the proposal will win over the young Democratic senators pressing for more sweeping changes. One of those senators, Jeff Merkley of Oregon, said Senate Democrats had a “very healthy debate” on Friday in a closed-door lunch dedicated to the rules-change debate. He continued to insist that any new rules include a measure that forces senators wishing to filibuster a bill to stand and talk until the body is worn down, a scenario captured in the classic movie, “Mr. Smith Goes to Washington.”

“It’s extremely important any package have the talking filibuster in it,” he said.

But to make that change, Democrats on Jan. 3 would have to pull what supporters call the “constitutional option” and what others in both parties call the “nuclear option” – forcing the change with a simple 51-vote majority by overruling the parliamentarian when he rules the changes out of order. By tradition, Senate rules changes take 67 votes to enact.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to xxxsdesdexxx (Reply #2)

Wed Jan 2, 2013, 03:11 PM

12. +100 nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to The Wielding Truth (Original post)

Wed Jan 2, 2013, 01:49 PM

4. Democratic Senate Leaders only get one chance, one day, to change the fillibuster rules

Reid better not waste it......

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to The Wielding Truth (Original post)

Wed Jan 2, 2013, 02:03 PM

6. This is a hopeful tweet..


FixTheSenate profile

FixTheSenate Great news from @SenatorTomUdall! "@SenatorReid's got 51 votes for the Constitutional option." bit.ly/12UmZwV #fixtheSenate 4 days ago · reply · retweet · favorite

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to The Wielding Truth (Reply #6)

Wed Jan 2, 2013, 03:59 PM

16. This is VERY good news. We'll see if Harry is ready to use it.

We just can't go on this way anymore. I'm sick and tired of the logjam in the Senate, and the Republicans are gearing up for more filibustering.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to The Wielding Truth (Original post)

Wed Jan 2, 2013, 02:11 PM

8. Change them -- enforce them. This country needs the "change". Have some backbone!!!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to The Wielding Truth (Original post)

Wed Jan 2, 2013, 03:01 PM

10. Trust

Dear Harry, don't think for one minute that you can TRUST the repugs because you can not. They lied to you last time and they will lie to you an the American public again, again and again.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to The Wielding Truth (Original post)

Wed Jan 2, 2013, 03:28 PM

13. Yes. Change the filibuster rules now!

...especially after Boehner told him to "Go fuck yourself." And this McConnell political childishness in the Senate has to come to a stop, once and for all. We can not have two more years of endless filibuster brick walls.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to The Wielding Truth (Original post)

Wed Jan 2, 2013, 03:38 PM

14. Agreed

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to The Wielding Truth (Original post)

Wed Jan 2, 2013, 03:49 PM

15. Truth be told. IMHO, I'm very impressed with the

restraint of one awesome member of the Senate.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to The Wielding Truth (Original post)

Wed Jan 2, 2013, 04:09 PM

17. Change them truly. Merkey's bill, not the watered down bill pushed by McCain and Schumer.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Mass (Reply #17)

Thu Jan 3, 2013, 12:28 PM

19. Yep. Why doesn't this have over 100 recs? n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to The Wielding Truth (Original post)

Wed Jan 2, 2013, 04:29 PM

18. Harry got boned by Bitchy Mitchy last time

It would be a bad idea to trust Him with another "gentlemen's agreement".

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to The Wielding Truth (Original post)

Thu Jan 3, 2013, 12:42 PM

20. Don't whine! Turn on C-Span2 right now!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread