The creation of this Super Congress will serve to magnify the Republicans' filibuster power

[Uncle Joe]

by eliminating reconciliation.

If you just have a straight up vote of what this "Super Congress" passes with no amendments, then both houses essentially agree on the same bill and there is no need for reconciliation; which is the only means to pass a bill were the Republicans can't filibuster.

Ironically this "Super Congress" shifts more power to the Republican controlled House to dictate events because now they don't have to worry about reconciliation eliminating the minority Republican Senate's filibuster power.

[Fumesucker]

1. Mission Accomplished..

:patriot:

[chelsea0011]

2. I thought they wanted to limit the size of government?

[Trajan]

3. There will be no super congress ....

One of the most cockamamie ideas to ever emerge from this band of nitwits .....

[MineralMan]

4. It's unconstitutional is what it is.

There's a reason for a bicameral legislature.

[BlueIdaho]

10. Right you are!

The constitution protects us all, giving the citizens of each state a representative voice and vote in every bill enacted into law.

Elitist pigs.

[Angry Dragon]

5. It is Treason

[DemocracyInaction]

6. It also elevates MINORITY to higher status

In committees, it's always the majority party has the majority of people on the committee. Now you could have the Congress full of Dems and ten repukes and they would have just as much power. Why bother with elections???

[tritsofme]

7. I'm not sure I understand what you are saying.

Why would Senate Republicans want to filibuster a bill that passed the GOP House?

Reconciliation is not available this year as there is no Senate budget resolution with instructions to the relevant committees.

[Uncle Joe]

8. Why is there no Senate budget resolution?

[tritsofme]

13. The Senate has declined to pass one.

[Uncle Joe]

15. I wonder why would they punt to the House?

I thought the Senate was supposed to be the "world's most deliberative body" and these tough economic times; are screaming for their budgetary leadership.

[tritsofme]

19. Well they haven't passed a budget since 2009

But it is less of an issue now with Republicans controlling the House, as they could vote down whatever the Senate passed in a Reconciliation bill.

[Uncle Joe]

21. In order to make it out of reconciliation, both Republicans and Democrats would come to terms.

If the Republicans in the House were then to vote against such a measure, you would have Republicans voting against Republicans and the chance of defeat would be reduced.

If nothing else those Republicans would need to explain their contradictory votes.

On the other hand a Democratic controlled Senate all but abandons its' leadership role, due to an institutionalized, dysfunctional fear of "filibuster" perhaps part of our economic problems are related to this vacuum of power.

How can you be a deliberative body if you don't deliberate?

[tritsofme]

22. I think you are confusing the budget reconciliation process, which allows the Senate

to pass certain bills with 51 votes, and the conference committee between the House and Senate to resolve the differences between their bills.

[Uncle Joe]

24. If the conference committee resolves the differences between their bills, where does it go next?

[tritsofme]

25. It goes back for a vote in both houses

Any changes made to the conference report by one house would have to be passed in the other as well, though the conference report is typically considered under rules that prohibit amendments.

[Uncle Joe]

26. Can the Senate still filibuster a bill; that has made it out of committee?

[tritsofme]

27. Yes. The Senate has several opportunities to filibuster a conference report.

The only major exception being a Reconciliation bill, which is not subject to filibuster and could pass with 50+1 votes.

[Uncle Joe]

30. Why wouldn't this be a budget Reconciliation bill, if it's reconciling the differences

between the House and Senate budget bills?

[tritsofme]

31. You are confusing the conference committee and budget reconciliation again.

They are two completely different things.

Budget reconciliation allows the Senate to pass a bill that meets certain conditions with 50+1 votes. There has not been a Reconciliation bill since the 2010 passage of HCR, and without a Senate budget resolution, they have simply lacked a vehicle for one.

However almost every bill that becomes law goes to a conference committee to resolve the differences between the House and Senate. While they may be "reconciling" their differences, this is not in any way related to the budget reconciliation process.

[Uncle Joe]

32. That goes back to my earlier point of the Senate punting and not trying to pass a budget resolution.

[tritsofme]

35. Well again, with a Republican House

the advantage of having Reconciliation available is significantly reduced. The House could vote down any bill passed by Senate Democrats through reconciliation.

In some respects in this environment it could actually favor liberal Democrats who would lose the power to filibuster a Reconciliation bill agreed to between the Republican and Democratic leadership.

You are right though, the punting is inexcusable. Reconciliation would have been very useful for Democrats before the 2010 elections.

[blkmusclmachine]

9. Game Over.

[hedgehog]

11. Can Boehner come up with 6 Republicans who won't sink the deal?

[Uncle Joe]

14. One thing I noticed during a recent news video

of the Congressional Leaders and perhaps it's always done this way and I just never picked up on it before but Boehner was sitting at the "head of the table" instead of Reid and Boehner was grinning like a Cheshire Cat.

[suffragette]

12. Very good point Uncle Joe

In a way this is reminding me of the recent "emergency manager" takeover in Michigan.

Similar co-opt of decision making from elected members and the opposite of representational democracy.

[H2O Man]

16. Recommended.

These are dangerous times.

[sabrina 1]

17. Thank you Uncle Joe

[malaise]

18. This cannot be legal

Rec

[mulsh]

20. I bet there are many organizations working up plans to litigate

any sort of "super congress" deal as soon as and if it gets instigated. I imagine the good folk over at CREW are one such group. nice try tho...

[tritsofme]

23. I don't see how it could possibly be successful.

Regardless of the process used to create a bill, it would clearly be lawful if it is duly passed by both houses and sent to the president.

[Bluenorthwest]

28. Regardless of the process?

Explain how that legality is so clear? I do not agree with you. They are establishing a body with power over the actual body. Electing their own mini Congress from among themselves.

[tritsofme]

29. What would constitutionally restrict Congress from acting in this manner?

The Constitution is clear in Article I Section 5: Each House may determine the Rules of its Proceedings

If in the end, identical bills are introduced in the House and Senate and they both pass it, and the president signs it, where does a constitutional issue exist?

[Uncle Joe]

33. Peace and thanks to everyone that posted.

[muriel_volestrangler]

34. Doesn't it get rid of the filibuster completely?

I saw it described as a 'straight up or down vote'; which means no filibuster possible.

It's a shit idea, but I can't see that it magnifies filibuster power.

[Igel]

37. Yup.

Each side appoints people to a committee to work out the language. When appointed, the reps can debate and fillibuster and then, maybe, vote. And in voting they close off all debate and chance for amendment of the committee recommendation. Once appointed, the committee works (or not).

Then they make a recommendation back to both houses for a final vote under the rules that the House and Senate previously agreed to. Then Obama gets to veto or approve it, depending on what he thinks about the text of the bill.

[virginian8v]

36. Quash the "Super Congress"

There's a petition to quash the "Super Congress" plan. If you oppose this plan, please sign and share: http://www.change.org/petitions/tell-congress-and-the-president-to-reject-the-idea-of-a-soviet-style-super-congress-now