PDA

View Full Version : Reid moves to limit GOP filibusters



txradioguy
11-07-2012, 02:46 PM
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid said Wednesday that he will try to push through a change to Senate rules that would limit the GOP’s ability to filibuster bills.

Speaking in the wake of Tuesday’s election, which boosted Senate Democrats’ numbers slightly, Mr. Reid said he won’t end filibusters altogether but that the rules need to change so that the minority party cannot use the legislative blocking tool as often.

“I think that the rules have been abused and that we’re going to work to change them,” he told reporters. “Were not going to do away with the filibuster but we’re going to make the Senate a more meaningful place.”

Republicans, who have 47 of the chamber’s 100 seats in this current Congress, have repeatedly used that strong minority to block parts of President Obama’s agenda on everything from added stimulus spending to his judicial picks.

A filibuster takes 60 senators to overcome it.

Leaders of both parties have been reluctant to change the rules because they value it as a tool when they are in the minority.

But Mr. Reid said things changed over the last few years when he repeatedly faced off against Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, Kentucky Republican, who had said his chief political goal was defeating Mr. Obama. Mr. Reid said that led the GOP to abuse the filibuster.

He did not say what changes he would support, though colleagues of his have proposed several potential changes.

One leading option would eliminate the chance to filibuster bringing a bill to the floor, though it would still let a minority filibuster actual passage. That proposal would also limit the number of amendments allowed by each side.

Senate Republicans say that only compound the real problem, which is Mr. Reid’s efforts to limit the number of amendments that can be offered on legislation. They said that when they are shut out of the amendment process, they have little leverage other than to block the entire bill.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2012/nov/7/reid-moves-limit-gop-filibusters/

Elspeth
11-07-2012, 02:53 PM
Then they'll reintroduce Cap and Tax.

Bailey
11-07-2012, 02:54 PM
Then they'll reintroduce Cap and Tax.


I am holding out hope that the Republicans can blunt this in the house. I doubt it but stranger things can happen.

txradioguy
11-07-2012, 03:37 PM
Then they'll reintroduce Cap and Tax.


They won't need to...the EPA is already instituting through regulations what couldn't get passed in Congress.

Obama isn't going to even look towards Capitol to get done all he wants to do to us...he's already proven that.

Now he believes he has a mandate to speed things up.

Veritas Aequitas
11-08-2012, 03:52 AM
You think they'd not want Republicans to have this kind of power when they inevitably regain power. Unless the Dems know something we don't about forthcoming elections.

Janice
11-08-2012, 08:17 AM
You think they'd not want Republicans to have this kind of power when they inevitably regain power. Unless the Dems know something we don't about forthcoming elections.

Didnt Valerie Jarrett say in part "After we win this election, it’s ... Payback time. There is going to be hell to pay. Congress won’t be a problem for us this time. No election to worry about after this is over ...” ?

theulstermanreport (http://theulstermanreport.com/2012/11/01/valerie-jarret-after-we-win-this-election-its-our-turn-payback-time-wsi/)

txradioguy
11-08-2012, 09:31 AM
Didnt Valerie Jarrett say in part "After we win this election, it’s ... Payback time. There is going to be hell to pay. Congress won’t be a problem for us this time. No election to worry about after this is over ...” ?

theulstermanreport (http://theulstermanreport.com/2012/11/01/valerie-jarret-after-we-win-this-election-its-our-turn-payback-time-wsi/)

Yup and she paraphrased W when she said "if you weren't with us you were against us" which ollows along the lines of Obama saying that "voting was the best revenge".

This is a very VERY vindictive bunch.

Arroyo_Doble
11-08-2012, 11:43 AM
That would be unwise both as a tactical as well as a strategic matter. Tactically, it does the Democrats no good since the House will be Republican for a long time; perhaps even until the next Census. Strategically, sauce for the goose and all that; Democrats may lose the majority in two years.

Even talking about it is stupid.

For my part, I believe it is a good idea to have a mechanism in the Senate to moderate the majority. Even the threshold of 60 may be too low.

m00
11-08-2012, 11:46 AM
You think they'd not want Republicans to have this kind of power when they inevitably regain power. Unless the Dems know something we don't about forthcoming elections.

Yeah, but that's what I was trying to tell people in the early 2000s... that there were certain things we didn't want to allow the Executive to have the power to do... even if you didn't think Bush wouldn't abuse this power, the next president might be Democrat. If a lot of Republicans didn't buy that argument then, I have no hope that Democrats will buy it now.

RobJohnson
11-08-2012, 12:42 PM
That would be unwise both as a tactical as well as a strategic matter. Tactically, it does the Democrats no good since the House will be Republican for a long time; perhaps even until the next Census. Strategically, sauce for the goose and all that; Democrats may lose the majority in two years.

Even talking about it is stupid.

For my part, I believe it is a good idea to have a mechanism in the Senate to moderate the majority. Even the threshold of 60 may be too low.


Look who shows back up after the election.......SHOCKER.

txradioguy
11-08-2012, 12:56 PM
Look who shows back up after the election.......SHOCKER.

All the turds are floating back to the surface to gloat.

Novaheart
11-08-2012, 01:05 PM
Hasn't the word "filibuster" come to mean something other than our mental image of an old southern gentleman reading from the American Red Cross Cook Book and Washington phone directory? Have they not ritualized this process?

Return to the physical filibuster would not be a bad thing. If it's really important to someone, let him stand for hours on end to oppose it.

txradioguy
11-08-2012, 01:09 PM
Hasn't the word "filibuster" come to mean something other than our mental image of an old southern gentleman reading from the American Red Cross Cook Book and Washington phone directory? Have they not ritualized this process?

You mean when Robert "Sheets" Byrd was blocking a vote on the Civil Rights Act of 1964?



:rolleyes:

Rockntractor
11-08-2012, 01:12 PM
Hasn't the word "filibuster" come to mean something other than our mental image of an old southern gentleman reading from the American Red Cross Cook Book and Washington phone directory? Have they not ritualized this process?

Return to the physical filibuster would not be a bad thing. If it's really important to someone, let him stand for hours on end to oppose it.

I tend to agree with that Nancy.

Rockntractor
11-08-2012, 01:15 PM
All the turds are floating back to the surface to gloat.

That's okay, it gives the evil we are up against a face.

Novaheart
11-08-2012, 01:26 PM
I tend to agree with that Nancy.

You can call me Dorothy. My friends call me Dotty-Jean. All of this tracks back to my days of having a similar haircut to Dorothy Hamill and competitive roller disco.

Rockntractor
11-08-2012, 01:55 PM
You can call me Dorothy. My friends call me Dotty-Jean. All of this tracks back to my days of having a similar haircut to Dorothy Hamill and competitive roller disco.

Is Dottie okay?

Arroyo_Doble
11-08-2012, 02:06 PM
Look who shows back up after the election.......SHOCKER.

I said prior to the election I would not be here yesterday.

Edit: If Obama won. In the unlikely event he would have lost, I would have been here to take my lumps.