Will the Senate scrap the filibuster?

Discussion in 'Politics' started by rightwinger, Dec 29, 2010.

  1. rightwinger
    Online

    rightwinger Paid Messageboard Poster Gold Supporting Member Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Aug 4, 2009
    Messages:
    120,248
    Thanks Received:
    19,821
    Trophy Points:
    2,190
    Location:
    NJ & MD
    Ratings:
    +45,329
    Will the Senate scrap the filibuster on January 5? - The Week

    A large group of Democratic senators, led by Majority Leader Harry Reid, wants to reform the filibuster process on January 5, the first day of the new Congress — when, according to precedent, the incoming Senate majority can alter the rules by a simple majority vote without fear of the process itself being filibustered. Although Reid's exact plans are unknown, the changes would reportedly require legislators to be speaking on the Senate floor in order to block a proposed bill (see Jimmy Stewart in Mr. Smith Goes to Washington). Will this work, and is it constitutional for Democrats to even be trying?
     
  2. rightwinger
    Online

    rightwinger Paid Messageboard Poster Gold Supporting Member Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Aug 4, 2009
    Messages:
    120,248
    Thanks Received:
    19,821
    Trophy Points:
    2,190
    Location:
    NJ & MD
    Ratings:
    +45,329
    On Jan. 5, the Senate has the chance to change the rules on filibusters and secret holds; it should take it - Wire - Lifestyle - bellinghamherald.com

    The filibuster originated in 1806, when the Senate eliminated a rule that had allowed the chamber to end debate by majority vote; in effect, that meant a senator or group of senators could delay progress by simply talking incessantly.

    But that hardly ever happened in the 19th century. It wasn't until 1917 that the Senate decided to limit these stemwinders by imposing a rule that debate could be ended by a supermajority vote. Since then there have been some other rule changes altering the vote threshold, along with frequent arguments about whether the Senate should go back to its original rule allowing debate to be ended with a simple majority vote. We think it should.

    Under the current system, senators don't even have to stand up and speak until they're hoarse in order to filibuster a bill; a party leader just has to refuse to allow a bill to be brought up by unanimous consent, forcing supporters to find 60 votes in favor of a motion to end debate.



    Read more: On Jan. 5, the Senate has the chance to change the rules on filibusters and secret holds; it should take it - Wire - Lifestyle - bellinghamherald.com
     
  3. DiamondDave
    Offline

    DiamondDave Army Vet

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2008
    Messages:
    18,169
    Thanks Received:
    2,812
    Trophy Points:
    183
    Location:
    MD, on the Potomac River
    Ratings:
    +2,816
    Yeah... talk of this always after power shifts... don't think it's gonna happen though
     
  4. RetiredGySgt
    Online

    RetiredGySgt Platinum Member

    Joined:
    May 6, 2007
    Messages:
    39,522
    Thanks Received:
    5,898
    Trophy Points:
    1,140
    Location:
    North Carolina
    Ratings:
    +8,932
    Go ahead, just remember that in 2012 the Republicans may control the Senate.
     
  5. Baruch Menachem
    Offline

    Baruch Menachem '

    Joined:
    Sep 12, 2008
    Messages:
    14,204
    Thanks Received:
    3,235
    Trophy Points:
    185
    Ratings:
    +3,305
    They have to be on the floor talking. None of this thing that came in during the last reform where they just do tag teams.
     
  6. pencilitin
    Offline

    pencilitin Rookie

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2010
    Messages:
    16
    Thanks Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    1
    Ratings:
    +1
    They're NEVER going to get rid of the filibuster IMHO... The fact is the senators are always afraid of the other side getting too much power. The filibuster is a check on that and they won't want to give it up.
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  7. rightwinger
    Online

    rightwinger Paid Messageboard Poster Gold Supporting Member Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Aug 4, 2009
    Messages:
    120,248
    Thanks Received:
    19,821
    Trophy Points:
    2,190
    Location:
    NJ & MD
    Ratings:
    +45,329
    Filibuster was a quaint, hardly used custom until recent Congresses.

    It is now used to change the Constitutional requirement of a majority vote in the Senate to pass legislation. Rather than being used for crucial legislation it has become a defacto 60% majority to pass laws.

    Both sides should sign up to filibuster reforms since both sides have been abusing it.

    The Democrats may benefit for now, but both sides, and more importantly, the country will benefit from ending the filibuster
     
  8. rightwinger
    Online

    rightwinger Paid Messageboard Poster Gold Supporting Member Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Aug 4, 2009
    Messages:
    120,248
    Thanks Received:
    19,821
    Trophy Points:
    2,190
    Location:
    NJ & MD
    Ratings:
    +45,329
    Southern Democrats were the first to seriously misuse this tactic during the civil rights era, but Republicans have perfected such abuse in the last three years. According to the good-government advocacy group Common Cause, which once defended the filibuster rule but now aims to eliminate it, 8 percent of major legislation was affected by threatened or actual filibusters in the 1960s, compared with 70 percent since 2006. The result is gridlock, which will only get worse now that the balance of partisan power is close to even

    Read more: On Jan. 5, the Senate has the chance to change the rules on filibusters and secret holds; it should take it - Wire - Lifestyle - bellinghamherald.com
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  9. Avatar4321
    Offline

    Avatar4321 Diamond Member Gold Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2004
    Messages:
    70,537
    Thanks Received:
    8,161
    Trophy Points:
    2,070
    Location:
    Minnesota
    Ratings:
    +12,153
    Then perhaps we shouldnt have our politicians telling us that we are constantly in a crisis and every piece of legislation is crucial?

    Or perhaps we just return the fillibuster to what it was originally.
     
  10. Revere
    Offline

    Revere BANNED

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2010
    Messages:
    7,427
    Thanks Received:
    415
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Watching you in my profile page
    Ratings:
    +415
    The filibuster has been around for 100+/- years.
     

Share This Page