Democrats continue to assault this republic

Discussion in 'Politics' started by (R)IGHTeous 1, Jan 4, 2011.

  1. (R)IGHTeous 1
    Offline

    (R)IGHTeous 1 GOPROUD

    Joined:
    Dec 5, 2010
    Messages:
    1,869
    Thanks Received:
    123
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    southeast Pennsylvania
    Ratings:
    +123
    Republicans Charge Harry Reid Power Grab on Filibuster
    By Paul Bedard
    Posted: January 4, 2011

    The Washington Post writes it off as a minor "tweak," but Senate Republicans today charged that Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid is mounting an unprecedented "power grab" that will essentially eliminate use of the filibuster in many cases like fighting liberal Supreme Court nominations.

    "It would forever change the nature of the Senate and constitute a naked partisan power grab. Such a move would disrespect our bipartisan system and the will of the American people," says a memo from the Senate Republican Policy Committee, headed by potential presidential candidate Sen. John Thune.

    At issue is a bid by Reid to change the filibuster rules this week by a simple majority, 51, instead of the traditional two thirds. Since Reid's party controls 53 seats (51 Democrats and independents Joe Lieberman of Connectictut and Bernie Sanders of Vermont), they could institute the change over GOP opposition.


    Republicans Charge Harry Reid Power Grab on Filibuster - US News and World Report
     
  2. BlindBoo
    Offline

    BlindBoo Gold Member

    Joined:
    Sep 28, 2010
    Messages:
    19,590
    Thanks Received:
    2,194
    Trophy Points:
    245
    Ratings:
    +4,389
    Show me where that Filibuster clause for Senate debate is in the Consitution!

    But Harry had better watch out. It is a double edge sword. Be carefull what you ask for, you just might get it, or rather come the next election cycle it might just be the Republican who can override the Dems filibuster!
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  3. Two Thumbs
    Offline

    Two Thumbs Platinum Member

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2010
    Messages:
    33,450
    Thanks Received:
    5,786
    Trophy Points:
    1,140
    Location:
    Where ever I go, there I am.
    Ratings:
    +11,589
    The filibuster has been abused. You used to have to stay on the floor to do it. Now you just have to declare it, then you can go get cocktails.

    But until it passes, and gets past the filibuster, it's a moot point. Reid can't say "you can't buster this one b/c I say so!" That would cause a long term backlash with people that like this age old tradition, and the dems would fall from grace (further).

    so it's a win-win even if he just tries.
     
  4. rightwinger
    Offline

    rightwinger Paid Messageboard Poster Gold Supporting Member Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Aug 4, 2009
    Messages:
    120,242
    Thanks Received:
    19,821
    Trophy Points:
    2,190
    Location:
    NJ & MD
    Ratings:
    +45,324
    The Republicans have shown they cannot be trusted with a filibuster. Children who abuse their privileges deserve to lose them
     
  5. JakeStarkey
    Offline

    JakeStarkey Diamond Member Supporting Member

    Top Poster Of Month

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2009
    Messages:
    136,918
    Thanks Received:
    12,306
    Trophy Points:
    2,165
    Ratings:
    +32,347
    I think the 60 vote requirement for closing argument is a good one, RW. However, a simply majority is all that is required to have the opponents stand, filibuster, and hold the floor. This puts everybody on record for the American people, and allows the issue to fully vetted.
     
  6. rightwinger
    Offline

    rightwinger Paid Messageboard Poster Gold Supporting Member Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Aug 4, 2009
    Messages:
    120,242
    Thanks Received:
    19,821
    Trophy Points:
    2,190
    Location:
    NJ & MD
    Ratings:
    +45,324
    Make them actually hold the floor then.

    Having to have 60% approval for a 50% vote is Bull Shit
     
  7. Cuyo
    Offline

    Cuyo Training a Guineapig army

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2010
    Messages:
    5,681
    Thanks Received:
    942
    Trophy Points:
    98
    Location:
    Denver, PA
    Ratings:
    +942
    You're incorrect TT, a change to the rules for a new session only requires a simple majority. It's not the same as a bill.
     
  8. Sallow
    Offline

    Sallow The Big Bad Wolf. Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Oct 4, 2010
    Messages:
    56,535
    Thanks Received:
    6,132
    Trophy Points:
    1,840
    Location:
    New York City
    Ratings:
    +7,394
    :lol::lol:

    When did it become "traditional" to have a 2/3 requirement on getting rules changed..or legislation voted upon?

    Oh wait..over the last 2 years. 275 times.:lol:
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  9. Sallow
    Offline

    Sallow The Big Bad Wolf. Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Oct 4, 2010
    Messages:
    56,535
    Thanks Received:
    6,132
    Trophy Points:
    1,840
    Location:
    New York City
    Ratings:
    +7,394
    The rule changes are needed. They aren't doing away with the Filibuster. And if anyone really really wants it back to the old way..they can reverse this.
     
  10. Cuyo
    Offline

    Cuyo Training a Guineapig army

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2010
    Messages:
    5,681
    Thanks Received:
    942
    Trophy Points:
    98
    Location:
    Denver, PA
    Ratings:
    +942
    While I couldn't agree more, I don't see how there's much political capital to be gained by killing it for this session. Dems already lost the House and statistically (based on who's up for re-election) will probably lose the Senate next year; Whether or not they retake the House, it's unlikely they'll be holding on to both again before '14.
     

Share This Page