Harry Reid Pledges Filibuster Reform

[lutherj]

Source: Huffington Post

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) pledged on Wednesday to take a serious look at revising the filibuster rules at the beginning of the next Congress, calling the current level of obstruction in the Senate unacceptable.

In a reflection of the party's commitment to changing the parliamentary rules, Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) followed the majority leader by saying that his committee would address the topic soon.

"The rules committee is going to start holding hearings on how to undo the filibuster rule," said Schumer, who chairs the Senate Rules Committee. The New York Democrat told the Huffington Post after the speech that the hearings would take place two or three weeks from now.

.....

Reid's embrace of filibuster reform comes after he previously threw cold water on the likelihood of getting the rules changed. His reference to the "next Congress" stands out. To change Senate rules in the middle of the session requires 67 votes, which Democrats clearly don't have. But changing the rules at the beginning of the 112th Congress will require the chair to declare the Senate is in a new session and can legally draft new rules. That ruling would be made by Vice President Joe Biden, who has spoken out against the current abuse of the filibuster. The ruling can be appealed, but that appeal can be defeated with a simple majority vote.

Read more: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/03/10/harry-reid-filibuster-rul_n_493474.html

[No Elephants]

1. I feel good about this IF Democrats are going to legislate like Democrats, If Democrats

are going to legislate like Republicans, the less legislation the better.

[lutherj]

2. Agreed. But at least the democrats wouldn't be able to hide behind the

republicans' obstructionism, and use it as an excuse not to do anything. The may force themselves to take a stand.

[Demeter]

3. I don't think Harry will be in the next Congress

[BunkerHill24]

8. My thoughts exactly. I guess it is too late for Harry. n/t

[Oregone]

4. If they reform it, shouldn't they go back and make health bill so good that only 50 of em want?

[WarhammerTwo]

5. Tread lightly here...

Remember what was referred to as the "Nuclear Option" by Republicans before they slapped it on reconciliation? It was when they threatened to take away the right of the minority party to filibuster back when they were in control of Congress. Granted if they had succeeded, Health Care reform probably would've passed eons ago with a public option, no less, and the Republicans would've been stewing in their own juices for getting rid of the filibuster in the first place. That being said, picture the shoe on the other foot... when Republicans eventually regain control. And we have strict filibuster rules in place. Think of all the crap legislation they will then be able to pass. All I'm saying is that the Democrats need to VERY, VERY CAREFUL when making these changes so it doesn't come back to bite them in the ass somewhere down the road.

[lutherj]

11. That's true, but I don't remember the dems filibustering anything in the two

years they controlled congress before Obama was elected. Bush got everything he wanted. Since the dems won't use it, might as well level the playing field.

[WarhammerTwo]

16. That was the whole point...

The Republicans said, "If you threaten to filibuster, we will use the NUCLEAR OPTION (using my best wavering spooky voice)and get rid of the filibuster all together! So ya best shut up and get out of the way, or we will forcibly remove you." So they never filibustered. The threat of the NUCLEAR OPTION (using my best wavering spooky voice)stopped the Dems dead in their tracks.

[bossy22]

12. the law of unintened consequences seems to apply here

[Synicus Maximus]

6. Be careful what you wish for you just might get it.

Sooner or later the republicans with hold a majority in the Senate and we may not be able to use the filibuster to stop some of their legislation.

[julian09]

7. Better hope dems hold majority in 2011

for this to happen.

[yurbud]

9. but he's willing to apologize if any Republicans are offended...

[0rganism]

10. hamstringing the minority just in time for the elections...

Sen. Reid better have a real good plan for handling the upcoming shitstorm of corporate-funded media-backed vote purchases, or he'll be eating his own dogfood.

Not that the Democrats ever launched a successful filibuster that I can remember while they were in the minority -- it's not like he's handicapping his party in any practical way.

[Javaman]

13. right harry. writing checks your ass can't cash.

you won't be in congress next time, because you're a failure. So go on, make all those promises that you should have made and kept last time around.

You did this to yourself harry. All by yourself.

thanks for fucking us all for many generations to come.

[Javaman]

14. right harry. writing checks your ass can't cash.

you won't be in congress next time, because you're a failure. So go on, make all those promises that you should have made and kept last time around.

You did this to yourself harry. All by yourself.

thanks for fucking us all for many generations to come.

[Romulox]

15. But how will he change the Senate rules without a super-duper-oooper majority?

If, as some DUers have suggested, past Senates may bind future Senates to rules that may only be changed on the votes of 75 Senators, then changing the Senate rules in this climate is not possible. I've never bought that argument, however.