Filibuster Reform? Harry Reid: You Damn Betcha!

[RobDownSouth]

Now that it would appear that President Obama is heading to a second term in office, and the United States Senate appears to have the minimum of 50 votes for a Democratic majority, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid is signalling he will work to enact meaningful filibuster reform when the next Congress is seated.

When each new congress is seated (January of odd-numbered years) they are required by law to set the rules that will govern the legislative branch for the next two years.

It's taken Majority Leader Reid this long to realize that the Republicans are not negotiating in good faith, and have essentially corrupt the concept of "majority rule" in the Senate into "super-majority rule" by filibustering virtually every piece of legislation, in essence requiring sixty votes to pass.

Reid has indicated that this is going to change. I'm hoping he does away with the automatic "intent to filibuster" rule that stops legislation. Let him keep the actual filibuster rule. If a Republican wants to filibuster something, let him argue the merits on the floor of the Senate....and then let the legislation be voted on.

This will do away with a substantial amount of gridlock in Washington, IMHO.

LINK

 

[Liar]

Didn't he say that in 2010 too?

 

[RobDownSouth]

Didn't he say that in 2010 too?

Yeah. I'm hoping he's fed up enough this time to actually do something about it.

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

Aint gonna happen. Democrats like the status quo as much as the GOP.

 

[mercury14]

Aint gonna happen. Democrats like the status quo as much as the GOP.

Disagree. Dems prefer a robust and active legislature and dislike gridlock far more than 'pubs.

 

[renard_ruse]

This thread isn't for real I hope. Fillibusters are the way the Senate was set up to operate. "Fed up" with the Constitution???

Absolutely unbelievable, even for Reid or the posters in this thread. I had no idea they were threatening to attack another check and balance worked into our system for temporary political reasons. Just so sad, its beyond words.

 

[Dazzle1]

Now that it would appear that President Obama is heading to a second term in office, and the United States Senate appears to have the minimum of 50 votes for a Democratic majority, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid is signalling he will work to enact meaningful filibuster reform when the next Congress is seated.

When each new congress is seated (January of odd-numbered years) they are required by law to set the rules that will govern the legislative branch for the next two years.

It's taken Majority Leader Reid this long to realize that the Republicans are not negotiating in good faith, and have essentially corrupt the concept of "majority rule" in the Senate into "super-majority rule" by filibustering virtually every piece of legislation, in essence requiring sixty votes to pass.

Reid has indicated that this is going to change. I'm hoping he does away with the automatic "intent to filibuster" rule that stops legislation. Let him keep the actual filibuster rule. If a Republican wants to filibuster something, let him argue the merits on the floor of the Senate....and then let the legislation be voted on.

This will do away with a substantial amount of gridlock in Washington, IMHO.

LINK

Just want to point out that Reid in the minority position defended the fillibuster when Dems used it to block nominations

 

[RobDownSouth]

Just want to point out that Reid in the minority position defended the fillibuster when Dems used it to block nominations

You are correct. The Rapepublicans, however, have systematically abused the filibuster process since they've been in minority status. Actions have consequences, and now reform is needed.

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

Just want to point out that Reid in the minority position defended the fillibuster when Dems used it to block nominations

THAT and the RINOs like McCain derail efforts to end the fillibuster option. Back when Frist ran the Senate McCain and Collins and others worked against Frists attempts to pass bills with simple majority votes.

 

[mercury14]

This thread isn't for real I hope. Fillibusters are the way the Senate was set up to operate. "Fed up" with the Constitution???

The filibuster isn't in the Constitution. There's simply a Senate rule that lets any one Senator talk infinitely about any topic, even ones that have nothing to do with the bill (ie reading the phone book). The filibuster is just a thing that came out of the Senate's Rules Committee.

Absolutely unbelievable, even for Reid or the posters in this thread. I had no idea they were threatening to attack another check and balance worked into our system for temporary political reasons. Just so sad, its beyond words.

I'm fine with the filibuster as it's always been but since Republicans decided to regularly use it even in the case of the most trivial legislation it needs to be changed. Republicans are squarely to blame for its abuse. The rule no longer works because of the GOP, now the GOP is bitching that the shit they broke needs to be fixed. THAT'S unbelievable.

The Dems are likely to keep the Senate in 2014 and in 2016 Republicans have to defend more than twice as many seats as Dems, so the Dems will certainly keep it then as well. Payback is a bitch.

 

[unregistered]

 

[Dazzle1]

You are correct. The Rapepublicans, however, have systematically abused the filibuster process since they've been in minority status. Actions have consequences, and now reform is needed.

They are exercising their rights and voting for what they feel is right.

they should be respected for that.

 

[RobDownSouth]

They are exercising their rights and voting for what they feel is right.

they should be respected for that.

Utter horseshit. When you routinely filibuster legislation to rename a post office, the system is broken.

Whether you like it or not, America was created as a majority-rule government in which the rights of the minority party are respected. The minority party has abused the filibuster privileges accorded to it, and now must pay the consequences.

 

[unregistered]

 

[cjh]

You mean like Democrat filibusters against the Civil Rights Act.

Who, back then, would have guessed that the Republican Party would become the party of angry old white men, and that that would prove to be its weakness?

 

[RobDownSouth]

You mean like Conservative filibusters against the Civil Rights Act.

I agree. Filibusters should be reserved for important issues of the day. Not renaming post offices.

 

[unregistered]

 

[cjh]

Who would have guessed the Democrat Party would ring down the curtain on Constitutional government and "sent hither swarms of Officers to harrass our people, and eat out their substance?"

The sky, indeed, is falling Vetteman Little.

 

[unregistered]

 

[RobDownSouth]

Don't try and tell me you don't see the parallel.

That parallel only exists in that fever swamp between your ears, i.e. in the non-reality-based world that gives you such comfort.

 

[cjh]

Don't try and tell me you don't see the parallel.

We will see.

Again, if it proves true, it'll be easy to prevent the appointment of the likes of John Bolton through procedural sleight of hand.

 

[unregistered]

 

[mercury14]

Republicans chide Democrats for not doing enough with their majority and then demand the ability to keep filibustering everything.

 

[unregistered]

 

[mercury14]

Why not, that's what they do.

Tell me the logic behind accusing the Dems of not doing enough when their bills are all filibustered? Seems to me they're doing plenty, Republicans just want rule by the minority.