Filibuster - Keep, Alter or Scrap?

[adrina]

Pretty basic....

1. keep as is
   
2. change back to talking filibuster
   
3. kiss it goodbye

 

[Paul_Chance]

Pretty basic....

1. keep as is
   
2. change back to talking filibuster
   
3. kiss it goodbye

I have long been an advocate of taking it back to the "talking" filibuster. This returns the filibuster to it's original form as a delaying and emphasis parliamentary procedure, not a permanent "stop and force a vote" tactic. When a senator elects to pursue a filibuster it becomes a question of simple endurance and highlights an issue, as opposed to being a permanent stop if there aren't the votes to override the filibuster.

 

[coati]

I say scrap it. Both parties have already scrapped it under various politically opportunistic circumstances. It's bad enough to have the Senate be a House of Lords where 25% of Americans have more than half of the decision-making power, but then to continue to give that 25% veto power over every fucking piece of legislation is ridiculous.

We have too many pressing problems facing us to continue to constipate the will of the people, particularly now when so many states are openly trying to suppress voting. The filibuster is not Constitutionally mandated. Dump it, and focus on ensuring voting rights for all. Democracy is coming to the U.S.A.

If Sinema can't handle that, we'll dump her in her next primary. Quit screwing around and get the robber barons under control.

 

[KeithD]

Consider what Mitch McConnell would do in this situation--and do that. If you hear Mitch squealing when you do it, you've made the right choice.

 

[phrodeau]

The majority should rule. The majority should decide what the rules are, and they need to stick to them.

 

[RobDownSouth]

I have long been an advocate of taking it back to the "talking" filibuster. This returns the filibuster to it's original form as a delaying and emphasis parliamentary procedure, not a permanent "stop and force a vote" tactic. When a senator elects to pursue a filibuster it becomes a question of simple endurance and highlights an issue, as opposed to being a permanent stop if there aren't the votes to override the filibuster.

This is my favored approach too. like Manchin says "Put some pain back in it'.

 

[icanhelp1]

I say scrap it. Both parties have already scrapped it under various politically opportunistic circumstances. It's bad enough to have the Senate be a House of Lords where 25% of Americans have more than half of the decision-making power, but then to continue to give that 25% veto power over every fucking piece of legislation is ridiculous.

We have too many pressing problems facing us to continue to constipate the will of the people, particularly now when so many states are openly trying to suppress voting. The filibuster is not Constitutionally mandated. Dump it, and focus on ensuring voting rights for all. Democracy is coming to the U.S.A.

If Sinema can't handle that, we'll dump her in her next primary. Quit screwing around and get the robber barons under control.

You need to take a civic lesson. The senate is not the house. The senate gives each state equal representation within the republic of 50 states and is not based on populous numbers. It saves us from becoming ** THE PEOPLE'S REPUBLIC OF CALIFORNIA**, hopefully it stays that way.

 

[JackLuis]

After Republicans threaten to stop all Senate business Biden reveals he'd support filibuster reform

Fuck MItch!

President Joe Biden previously indicated he wouldn't support reforming the filibuster in the Senate but after it took months to pass the next round of COVID-19 stimulus, he appears to be changing his mind.

"Aren't you going to have to choose between preserving the filibuster, and advancing your agenda?" asked George Stephanopoulos in an ABC News interview.

"Yes, but here's the choice: I don't think that you have to eliminate the filibuster, you have to do it what it used to be when I first got to the Senate back in the old days," Biden explained. "You had to stand up and command the floor, you had to keep talking."

 

[phrodeau]

You need to take a civic lesson. The senate is not the house. The senate gives each state equal representation within the republic of 50 states and is not based on populous numbers. It saves us from becoming ** THE PEOPLE'S REPUBLIC OF CALIFORNIA**, hopefully it stays that way.

All the more reason to rein in the power of the minority.

 

[coati]

You need to take a civic lesson. The senate is not the house. The senate gives each state equal representation within the republic of 50 states and is not based on populous numbers. It saves us from becoming ** THE PEOPLE'S REPUBLIC OF CALIFORNIA**, hopefully it stays that way.

^^^Not with fascists trying to suppress the vote.

Screw the right-wing fascists-- dump the filibuster. Limit the power of USA's House of Lords.

 

[jaF0]

I'd prefer they all get down to the business of serving us, the voters and knock off the partisan posturing and fluffernutting.

 

[Philthy_Phil]

I say I don't care because I don't know what it does.

 

[Paul_Chance]

I think one of the challenges is that as Senators, serving the longer six year term, if they decide to give the filibuster up or change it the majority of Senators of both parties have used it when they were in the Senate minority - and they're well aware of it's powerful applications when they're there.

Combine that with anyone with any lengthy experience has seen the electoral swings. Both parties probably dream of a permanent majority, but experience has taught them otherwise.

Everyone wants to take power away from the minority when they're in the majority - but at the same time they have the awareness that such a power shift will inevitably land in the hands of the opposing party.

 

[KeithD]

Everyone wants to take power away from the minority when they're in the majority - but at the same time they have the awareness that such a power shift will inevitably land in the hands of the opposing party.

True, but Mitch McConnell landed the Senate in the "just do it for immediate gain" mess. The Democrats could try to stuff that bunny back in the bag, but now that McConnell has done it--and will do it again as often as he's given the chance--there's little reason not to do it as well. That bunny ain't going back into the bag without a major overhaul of the Senate rules system.

 

[phrodeau]

Five of the nine current Supreme Court justices were confirmed by Senators representing a minority of Americans. The minority has more than enough power, in my opinion.

 

[siobhancan99]

Every time the dems fuck with the filibuster it bites them in the ass hard. If they want to tighten it up, it should go back to the talking filibuster (which honestly it never should have departed from).

 

[Paul_Chance]

True, but Mitch McConnell landed the Senate in the "just do it for immediate gain" mess. The Democrats could try to stuff that bunny back in the bag, but now that McConnell has done it--and will do it again as often as he's given the chance--there's little reason not to do it as well. That bunny ain't going back into the bag without a major overhaul of the Senate rules system.

I have zero objections to an overhaul of Senate rules (or House rules). The system is designed so they can set their own rules - it's within their power to determine and implement. It does come back to eventually the rules are going to work against you/for you as the electorate swings the pendulum, so be careful what you wish for. As Phrodeau mentions below, it was that change to the Senate rules in the judiciary that gives Biden the power to pass through his judicial selections rapidly. Good, bad, indifferent all depends on where you sit on the political spectrum - and that spectrum is constantly changing.

Five of the nine current Supreme Court justices were confirmed by Senators representing a minority of Americans. The minority has more than enough power, in my opinion.

 

[icanhelp1]

True, but Mitch McConnell landed the Senate in the "just do it for immediate gain" mess. The Democrats could try to stuff that bunny back in the bag, but now that McConnell has done it--and will do it again as often as he's given the chance--there's little reason not to do it as well. That bunny ain't going back into the bag without a major overhaul of the Senate rules system.

Which was pioneered by the diabolical Harry Reid to pack the lower courts.

 

[coati]

Sounds like there are a bunch of conservative wimps on this thread, trying to rationalize the status quo as if it were a holy grail for middle school civics students.

Wake up, wimps! A major political party just attempted to reverse the results of an election that was certified in all 50 states and that actually ended up being very kind to that party's Congressional and Senatorial candidates, but just did not happen to elect their crooked Presidential candidate. Now that same political party is attempting to block legislation via filibuster that would prevent states from suppressing the votes of millions of citizens. Many of these autocrats still haven't acknowledged the results of the last Presidential election, and some support the perpetrators of the January 6th insurrection attempt

And yet, here you are talking about "protecting the minority party". Bullshit. The filibuster is most famous for blocking civil rights legislation for decades. Wake up, wimps, and do exactly what Keith said in the thread above, which is roll over Mitch in the same way that he would do if he were in the majority.

 

[KeithD]

Which was pioneered by the diabolical Harry Reid to pack the lower courts.

Perfected by Mitch McConnell is the issue. So, I'd do whatever McConnell would do in this case. Democrats have been much too Goody Two-shoes (cough, cough. Obama) waiting for Republicans to actually care about the American people.

 

[icanhelp1]

Perfected by Mitch McConnell is the issue. So, I'd do whatever McConnell would do in this case. Democrats have been much too Goody Two-shoes (cough, cough. Obama) waiting for Republicans to actually care about the American people.

Yah! Democrats are all about lollipops and ice cream! LMFAO

 

[icanhelp1]

Sounds like there are a bunch of conservative wimps on this thread, trying to rationalize the status quo as if it were a holy grail for middle school civics students.

Wake up, wimps! A major political party just attempted to reverse the results of an election that was certified in all 50 states and that actually ended up being very kind to that party's Congressional and Senatorial candidates, but just did not happen to elect their crooked Presidential candidate. Now that same political party is attempting to block legislation via filibuster that would prevent states from suppressing the votes of millions of citizens. Many of these autocrats still haven't acknowledged the results of the last Presidential election, and some support the perpetrators of the January 6th insurrection attempt

And yet, here you are talking about "protecting the minority party". Bullshit. The filibuster is most famous for blocking civil rights legislation for decades. Wake up, wimps, and do exactly what Keith said in the thread above, which is roll over Mitch in the same way that he would do if he were in the majority.

Nancy Pelosi showed her true colors conjuring up a 1.9 trillion dollar boondoggle without any republican input knowing full well it would pass the house with the slim majority leaving half of America out in left field. The house passed HR-1 with zero republican support. If legislation is forced down everyone’s throat based on a simple majority and the minority is cut out the deliberative process, well, the next step is tyranny. Our founding fathers knew what they were doing. If a Bill can’t pass with 60 votes then perhaps it’s a crappy bill and needs attention.

 

[adrina]

Perfected by Mitch McConnell is the issue. So, I'd do whatever McConnell would do in this case. Democrats have been much too Goody Two-shoes (cough, cough. Obama) waiting for Republicans to actually care about the American people.

*cough*Newt Gingrich*cough*

(If one wants to draw a linear connection to the present.)

 

[Paul_Chance]

And Manchin just backed off on his support, saying he prefers to stay at 60...

Of course, he could just be holding up Schumer for something (a nice tax break for cost transfer for his state, ala the Cornhusker Compromise).

 

[KeithD]

Nancy Pelosi showed her true colors conjuring up a 1.9 trillion dollar boondoggle

That's where you and the Republicans in Congress are despicable and shoud shove your boat off from the American shores. Pulling the American people out of this Covid crisis is NOT a boondoggle, you poor excuse for a human being. The Republicans in Congress had the chance to work together with the Democrats on this problem and haven't taken it, and you have had the chance to use your brain, but you won't do that.