Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
Harry Reid Nuking Filibuster Rules [View all] trailmonkee Nov 2012 OP
More good news. n/t BellaKos Nov 2012 #1
Reid adheres to that "speak softly but carry a big stick" policy! LibGranny Nov 2012 #2
This time it will really, really happen MannyGoldstein Nov 2012 #3
This is the first time I recall Reid actually supporting the idea BlueStreak Nov 2012 #28
2010: Reid promises filibuster reform MannyGoldstein Nov 2012 #40
No, he needs to make sure there are enough votes railsback Nov 2012 #59
2010: "And we're going to make some changes in it.” MannyGoldstein Nov 2012 #67
4) Require 2/5th opposition to closure. ieoeja Nov 2012 #45
I don't see how that would work. BlueStreak Nov 2012 #48
You understood me backwards. Not 40 to cut off a filibuster. 40 to maintain a filibuster. ieoeja Nov 2012 #53
That's what we have today -- 60 votes required to cut off debate BlueStreak Nov 2012 #58
Not at all. jeff47 Nov 2012 #78
You are making a distinction without a difference BlueStreak Nov 2012 #83
No, you are not paying attention to the subtle difference. jeff47 Nov 2012 #89
So how would that work? BlueStreak Nov 2012 #90
. DURHAM D Nov 2012 #4
But the House will still be intransigent. Is there anything that can be done about that?? barnabas63 Nov 2012 #5
Senate Holds the Purse Strings... sally5050 Nov 2012 #8
House never had a fillibuster. caseymoz Nov 2012 #24
Incorrect Dragonfli Nov 2012 #30
However, I was told this by a source I implicitly trust . . . caseymoz Nov 2012 #68
We are a culture ridden with faux-axioms; influenced by a non-objective profit driven media. Dragonfli Nov 2012 #91
The House did have a filibuster until the mid-19th century. NYC Liberal Nov 2012 #34
As I've now been corrected. caseymoz Nov 2012 #69
So, if the House hasn't had a filibuster in over a century, does the Senate need one? n/t gkhouston Nov 2012 #85
Nope. Not IMO. Nuke it. NYC Liberal Nov 2012 #88
Why Not Nuke It? RobinA Nov 2012 #31
Yep. Wait Wut Nov 2012 #44
Each new session can totally re-instate any rules that previous sessions "nuked." ancianita Nov 2012 #66
Nope, that would be the House. nt awoke_in_2003 Nov 2012 #46
The House holds those, actually. Codeine Nov 2012 #75
Pass these around in the first session... FailureToCommunicate Nov 2012 #10
We need bulk pricing. AllyCat Nov 2012 #84
It could get worse. xxqqqzme Nov 2012 #14
The Senate is key to appointments. caseymoz Nov 2012 #22
I wish Cosmocat Nov 2012 #61
We'll see. caseymoz Nov 2012 #70
can't Obama make recess appointments? Ashened Nov 2012 #94
Recess appointments are constitutionally limited. caseymoz Nov 2012 #99
The obstruction by Republicans in the Senate was not always clear to people who don't pay close dflprincess Nov 2012 #92
Now can we confirm Goodwin Liu to Supreme Court or at least the 9th circuit? IfPalinisAnswerWatsQ Nov 2012 #6
And when the Republicans gain control of the Senate Art_from_Ark Nov 2012 #37
If these rethugs do ever win the Senate caveat_imperator Nov 2012 #43
BINGO IfPalinisAnswerWatsQ Nov 2012 #47
glad to here it spoken out loud JanT Nov 2012 #7
Can't the Republicans just, well, filibuster this? (nt) Posteritatis Nov 2012 #9
No... Blue Idaho Nov 2012 #12
+1 nt ProudProgressiveNow Nov 2012 #18
Ah! Okay. Posteritatis Nov 2012 #20
But can only be done that way at the START of a new Senate term -- i.e. this January. BlueStreak Nov 2012 #29
Thank you - I forgot to add that part. nt. Blue Idaho Nov 2012 #73
Possibly kurt_cagle Nov 2012 #26
What Does He Mean By - "We're Not Going To Do Away With The Filibuster But We're Going To Make.... global1 Nov 2012 #11
He will change the rule so cosmicone Nov 2012 #15
Why Not A Simple Majority Of 51?..... global1 Nov 2012 #32
Without a filibuster, Bork would have been on SCOTUS. n/t cosmicone Nov 2012 #64
I don't know why he is so fond of the filibuster but he is. He has said so. Cleita Nov 2012 #51
Remember when the Repukes were in charge they whined about any filibuster K8-EEE Nov 2012 #17
I'd be fine with them if they actually had to stand up and speak in order to do one. (nt) Posteritatis Nov 2012 #21
Or make filibuster like it was in Mr. Smith goes to Washington 99th_Monkey Nov 2012 #25
Yes, not only is it inconvenient -- it's also highly VISIBLE. NYC Liberal Nov 2012 #35
Great point! yes. that too. nt 99th_Monkey Nov 2012 #52
Yeah a real filibuster would be great! pam4water Nov 2012 #42
If you want this to happen - contact Harry Reid ASAP! Blue Idaho Nov 2012 #13
imho, the filibuster rules should be suspended until the republicans decide to plan nice Mr. Sparkle Nov 2012 #16
Leave the rules alone. Make the repugs stand there and read the fucking phone book.... Hotler Nov 2012 #71
Bout time.. nt ProudProgressiveNow Nov 2012 #19
This is as good news as the Obama victory CanonRay Nov 2012 #23
Don't just flap your lips about it, Harry. DO IT. kestrel91316 Nov 2012 #27
Fuck yeah!!! now lets pass that jobs bill please!!! and-justice-for-all Nov 2012 #33
I will believe it when I see it. nm rhett o rick Nov 2012 #36
I am sorry to say I share your pessimism whole heartily. harun Nov 2012 #96
I am afraid that's what I believe. nm rhett o rick Nov 2012 #97
I think that is an excelent decision. Agnosticsherbet Nov 2012 #38
Bout time! nt freedom fighter jh Nov 2012 #39
Four years late. tclambert Nov 2012 #49
Gets hopes up so they can dashed once again XD pam4water Nov 2012 #41
Fuck Mitch McConnell and the Turtle he rode in on jpak Nov 2012 #50
Reid better be careful. Beacool Nov 2012 #54
Not a problem. The Democrats never use these things to our advantage anyway. yardwork Nov 2012 #56
Why do you think a Republican majority would keep the filibuster? jeff47 Nov 2012 #79
I wouldn't have a problem with this Blasphemer Nov 2012 #81
Give em hell, Harry. yardwork Nov 2012 #55
The filibuster is supposed to allow senators to remain talking on the floor to make their point. Kablooie Nov 2012 #57
I hope so, Harry Reid has been WAY too soft. DividedWeAre Nov 2012 #60
I hope he follows through..... Swede Atlanta Nov 2012 #62
YES! silverweb Nov 2012 #63
Can we get rid of the ridiculous invisible hold rule as well? MessiahRp Nov 2012 #65
^^ This. You wanna hold something up, you should be able to defend it. n/t gkhouston Nov 2012 #86
Well you better get busy! You have lots to do. lonestarnot Nov 2012 #72
We need to change the rules to allow Democrats to keep the Repugs from gridlocking us into ... Nika Nov 2012 #74
DO IT, Harry and secure your legacy! wordpix Nov 2012 #76
No need to try and save it. D23MIURG23 Nov 2012 #77
if he leaves them a way to use it- they WILL. BlueMan Votes Nov 2012 #80
I'll believe it when it actually happens. Angleae Nov 2012 #82
It's about fucking time, but I'll believe it when I see it yurbud Nov 2012 #87
Good start. sarcasmo Nov 2012 #93
Kick! sarcasmo Nov 2012 #95
They need to remove the fake filibuster. ManiacJoe Nov 2012 #98
Latest Discussions»Latest Breaking News»Harry Reid Nuking Filibus...»Reply #2