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 Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

2016 Postmortem

Showing Original Post only (View all)

Tx4obama

(36,974 posts)
Thu Jan 24, 2013, 07:31 PM Jan 2013

Harry Reid: ‘I’m Not Ready…To Get Rid Of The 60-Vote Threshold’ [View all]



Harry Reid: ‘I’m Not Ready…To Get Rid Of The 60-Vote Threshold’

Reid isn’t ready for filibuster reform and told Ezra Klein why.

“With the history of the Senate, we have to understand the Senate isn’t and shouldn’t be like the House.”

What will be reformed is how the Senate moves to consider new legislation, the process by which all nominees — except Cabinet-level appointments and Supreme Court nominations — are considered, and the number of times the filibuster can be used against a conference report.

…the deal Reid struck with McConnell doesn’t end the filibuster against the motion to proceed. Rather, it creates two new pathways for moving to a new bill. In one, the majority leader can, with the agreement of the minority leader and seven senators from each party, sidestep the filibuster when moving to a new bill. In the other, the majority leader can short-circuit the filibuster against moving to a new bill so long as he allows the minority party to offer two germane amendment that also can’t be filibustered. Note that in all cases, the minority can still filibuster the bill itself.


http://www.alan.com/2013/01/24/harry-reid-im-not-ready-to-get-rid-of-the-60-vote-threshold/


Full Ezra Klein Washington Post article here: http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2013/01/24/harry-reid-explains-why-he-killed-filibuster-reform/


=====================================




Also...

Two of the things that Reid has been fighting will be eliminated by the new rules.

I think even though these are modest changes they are going to be a big improvement
I've been following the judicial nominations for several years and the new change is going to be a HUGE help in getting them confirmed faster.

"... post cloture time for non appellate judges will be cut from 30 hours to 2 ... "
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1251280012



Also there will be NO more 'anonymous' holds/objections


-snip-

Under the agreement, the minority party will be able to offer two amendments on each bill, a major concession to Republicans. This change is made only as a standing order, not a rules change, and expires at the end of the term.

The new rules will also make it easier for the majority to appoint conferees once a bill has passed, but leaves in place the minority's ability to filibuster that motion once -- meaning that even after the Senate and House have passed a bill, the minority can still mount a filibuster one more time.

Reid won concessions on district court nominations as well. Under the old rules, after a filibuster had been beaten, 30 more hours were required to pass before a nominee could finally be confirmed. That delay threatened to tie the chamber in knots. The new rules will only allow two hours to pass after cloture is invoked before a nominee is confirmed.

The two leaders agreed that they will make some changes in how the Senate carries out filibusters under the existing rules, reminiscent of the handshake agreement last term, which quickly fell apart. First, senators who wish to object or threaten a filibuster must actually come to the floor to do so. And second, the two leaders will make sure that debate time post-cloture is actually used in debate. If senators seeking to slow down business simply put in quorum calls to delay action, the Senate will go live, force votes to produce a quorum, and otherwise work to make sure senators actually show up and debate.

The arrangement between Reid and McConnell means that the majority leader will not resort to his controversial threat, known as the "nuclear option," to change the rules via 51 votes on the first day of the congressional session. Reid may have been able to achieve greater reforms that way, but several members of his own party were uncomfortable with the precedent it would have set. And Reid himself, an institutionalist, wanted a bipartisan deal for the long-term health of the institution. Reid presented McConnell with two offers -- one bipartisan accord consisting of weaker reforms, and a stronger package Reid was willing to ram through on a partisan vote. McConnell chose the bipartisan route.

-snip-

Full article here: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/01/24/harry-reid-mitch-mcconnell-filibuster_n_2541356.html



39 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
The 41 vote idea at least made the blockers put in the effort instead of the Democrats high density Jan 2013 #1
Not sure why the 41 vote idea died. DCBob Jan 2013 #2
It died because it would have made it too hard to continue to filibuster. PoliticAverse Jan 2013 #5
Don't know why they bothered with anything then budkin Jan 2013 #20
It seemed to die not long after I posited that we might monitor those situations here yesterday... cascadiance Jan 2013 #36
I should tweet Reid... Isoldeblue Jan 2013 #3
Closing women's clinics down and gerrymandering is going on at the STATE level. Tx4obama Jan 2013 #7
Well, excuse me......... Isoldeblue Jan 2013 #12
fuck harry reid roguevalley Jan 2013 #17
NO more 'anonymous' holds/objections abelenkpe Jan 2013 #4
That doesn't make me feel any better. earthside Jan 2013 #6
After four years of voting abuses, this 'leader' will never be ready. Ridiculous institutionalist. ancianita Jan 2013 #8
What's wrong with majority rule, Harry? The filibuster is NOT even in the Constitution. Zen Democrat Jan 2013 #9
Oh, so they'll have to take credit for gridlocking the senate? Jester Messiah Jan 2013 #10
Reid got the majority of what he wanted. Please take time to read all of the OP :) Tx4obama Jan 2013 #11
That's the problem. jeff47 Jan 2013 #13
The problem it seems to me is that what he appears to want is to allow obstruction Dragonfli Jan 2013 #14
OK fine, but he should have wanted more and fought for more. He only had to change two votes. n/t totodeinhere Jan 2013 #38
Ezra Klein....last para says it all for me... pkdu Jan 2013 #15
The Democrats will likely be in the minority in 2014. Harry Reid knows this. Liberal_Stalwart71 Jan 2013 #16
That's what everybody said last time. Wrong! ncteechur Jan 2013 #22
Too many Dems up for reelection in RED states. Prove me wrong Liberal_Stalwart71 Jan 2013 #30
And here Reid ensures it. Creideiki Jan 2013 #34
If they are in the minority, which I doubt, the GOP can go ahead and eliminate the filibuster totodeinhere Jan 2013 #39
Eliminating the cowardly anonymous holds is a huge improvement! GOP did it too mcuh under Bush. freshwest Jan 2013 #18
Thank YOU. You're the first person that I've seen (other than me) that has said anything good... Tx4obama Jan 2013 #19
The sudden interest in arcane procedural drama by those who wanted Obama to assume the powers of a freshwest Jan 2013 #23
If there are so few people who can look at crap Creideiki Jan 2013 #35
Thanks for the most minimal piece of fucking shit you could possibly fucking do Harry!! ncteechur Jan 2013 #21
4 More Years Of The Last 4 Years. blkmusclmachine Jan 2013 #24
1 Party, 2 Faces blkmusclmachine Jan 2013 #25
Sen. Harry Reid (R-NV) for all practical purposes. n/t CincyDem Jan 2013 #26
lol... coockoo, coockoo... fascisthunter Jan 2013 #27
Wow. That sounds convoluted and ineffectual. Kablooie Jan 2013 #28
Glad a name oldandhappy Jan 2013 #29
get rid of him. HE IS A USED UP OLD MAN. NO GOOD TO THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY trueblue2007 Jan 2013 #31
History will show that Harry’s stunt will be recorded as the day stultusporcos Jan 2013 #32
Harry Reid you are an OLD FOOL! UCmeNdc Jan 2013 #33
Very Very Disappointed LeFleur1 Jan 2013 #37
Latest Discussions»Retired Forums»2016 Postmortem»Harry Reid: ‘I’m Not Read...»Reply #0