Reid Changing Filibuster Rules

[Amelia]

The rule change doesn't apply to legislation Amelia only to appointments

Confused about the 'nuclear option?' What you need to know - NBC Politics

Q: The Senate did something important today, but I’m confused: What exactly did they change?

A: Essentially, the Senate voted to eliminate filibusters for most presidential nominations. Nominations – like for judgeships or cabinet positions – previously had to get the support of 60 or more senators before a final vote if the minority party tried to block them. Under the new rules, most nominations will only need a simple majority to go forward.

So?

These include appointments to agencies who will changes rules and regulations without consulting the legislature. These agencies no longer will need to have any balance. Whatever nomination Obama makes after taking a walk through the rose garden with his secret service agents will be rubber-stamped by the Senate.

This will result in massive changes of policy driven by ideology without being balanced by the wants and needs of the majority.

 

[Amelia]

And then when he fucks things up even worse than he has done already, ensuring Republican control of the government in 2016, there will be nothing to restrain the new Republican president. The Republican president will have promised that he'll be better than Democrats and will have promised that he'll listen to voices across the spectrum, but once he has the Oval Office what power will there be to make him remember his promise?

None.



There will be havoc.

Republican President? Who?

The one who will be elected to pick up the pieces in 2016 now that Obama and Democrats have shown that they can't be trusted with government. Between the incompetence and the power grabs, Democrats have given America the most profound lessons imaginable about the dangers of leaving power in the hands of their party.

 

[blackhawk]

So if the Republicans had gone ahead done this in 2005 as they thought about but did not do when the Democrats were blocking President Bush's nominations the left here would have been fine with it?

 

[Dot Com]

The rule change doesn't apply to legislation Amelia only to appointments

Confused about the 'nuclear option?' What you need to know - NBC Politics

Q: The Senate did something important today, but I’m confused: What exactly did they change?

A: Essentially, the Senate voted to eliminate filibusters for most presidential nominations. Nominations – like for judgeships or cabinet positions – previously had to get the support of 60 or more senators before a final vote if the minority party tried to block them. Under the new rules, most nominations will only need a simple majority to go forward.

So?

These include appointments to agencies who will changes rules and regulations without consulting the legislature. These agencies no longer will need to have any balance. Whatever nomination Obama makes after taking a walk through the rose garden with his secret service agents will be rubber-stamped by the Senate.

This will result in massive changes of policy driven by ideology without being balanced by the wants and needs of the majority.

balance? I'd be surprised if Repubs even nominated people to EPA, OSHA, Dept of Education, or Dept of Labor unless it was to sabotage them or install people like insurance people or oilmen. You make me laugh

 

[BecauseIKnow]

Intense is going to burn in hellfire.

 

[Dot Com]

And then when he fucks things up even worse than he has done already, ensuring Republican control of the government in 2016, there will be nothing to restrain the new Republican president. The Republican president will have promised that he'll be better than Democrats and will have promised that he'll listen to voices across the spectrum, but once he has the Oval Office what power will there be to make him remember his promise?

None.

There will be havoc.

Republican President? Who?

The one who will be elected to pick up the pieces in 2016 now that Obama and Democrats have shown that they can't be trusted with government. Between the incompetence and the power grabs, Democrats have given America the most profound lessons imaginable about the dangers of leaving power in the hands of their party.

Give me a name.

 

[dblack]

Republican President? Who?

The one who will be elected to pick up the pieces in 2016 now that Obama and Democrats have shown that they can't be trusted with government. Between the incompetence and the power grabs, Democrats have given America the most profound lessons imaginable about the dangers of leaving power in the hands of their party.

Give me a name.

Something that rhymes with "Adolph Hitler".

 

[Amelia]

The rule change doesn't apply to legislation Amelia only to appointments

Confused about the 'nuclear option?' What you need to know - NBC Politics

So?

These include appointments to agencies who will changes rules and regulations without consulting the legislature. These agencies no longer will need to have any balance. Whatever nomination Obama makes after taking a walk through the rose garden with his secret service agents will be rubber-stamped by the Senate.

This will result in massive changes of policy driven by ideology without being balanced by the wants and needs of the majority.

balance? I'd be surprised if Repubs even nominated people to EPA, OSHA, Dept of Education, or Dept of Labor unless it was to sabotage them or install people like insurance people or oilmen. You make me laugh

And now they will be able to nominate insurance people and oilmen to those agencies and the NLRB, the CFPB, the FHFA, etc. without nothing but a rubber stamp from the Republicans in the Senate.

Are you getting it yet?

How much which is precious to liberals will the next Republican president be able to dismantle because the braking mechanism has been removed from the process?

 

[Dot Com]

Repubs have always nominated lobbyist/pro-big biz/anti-labor hacks to important executive agency positions. No change there.

 

[Amelia]

Repubs have always nominated lobbyist/pro-big biz/anti-labor hacks to important executive agency positions. No change there.

There will be change now. Presidents at least had to make an appearance of seeking candidates who could intelligently address the concerns of a wide variety of people.

Now there is no oversight.

It will be just as bad for Democrats to make one-sided appointments. Academics and bundlers are not going to make good policy.

Your partisan cackling is getting in the way of you realizing what the ramifications of this will be.

All dessert and no meat. That's what Democrats just ordered.



I was opposed to this in 2005. Senators such as Obama, Reid, Biden and Clinton who told how bad this would be were correct. The truth didn't change in the last 8 years.

 

[Dot Com]

its just to move the nomination forward for a vote Amelia. Many Repubs ended up voting 'yes' for nominations that they held back to a glacial pace simply to kill time/gum up the process.

 

[Amelia]

its just to move the nomination forward for a vote Amelia. Many Repubs ended up voting 'yes' for nominations that they held back to a glacial pace simply to kill time/gum up the process.

It is a de facto rubber stamp. The majority party will not vote against their president's nominee. Some might cast off a no vote to make a statement if their vote isn't needed for confirmation, but if their vote is needed then it will be there.

With the threat of a meaningful vetting process removed, the president doesn't have to have any restraint.

"Advice and consent" is now just automatic consent when the President and the leader of the Senate are in the same party.

Zip through the formalities of committee. Zip through the formalities of the vote.

All dessert, no meat. Not good for Republicans. Not good for Democrats. Not good for Americans.

 

[Dot Com]

the simple majority is just to move the nominations forward Amelia so they can get an up or down vote. Repubs have filibustered nominees for ages just to vote yes after their obstruction expired. Take your partisan blinders off for once

 

[Amelia]

the simple majority is just to move the nominations forward Amelia so they can get an up or down vote..

All votes at all stages will be mere formalities now.

A Democrat president's nominee will automatically be given a vote by the Senate no matter how bad of a fit that nominee is for the job. The Democrat president's nominee will automatically have enough votes to be confirmed. As long as the Democrats hold the Senate.

Republicans will do the same when they have both the White House and the Senate.

More than ever, the only protection Americans will have is gridlock -- if they don't make sure to give the Senate to the party who doesn't have the White House, then there is no mechanism for ensuring that qualified people lead the various agencies which set policy.






And to your edit: you take the partisan blinders off.

This is BAD governance. For everybody.

Harry Reid has given away the Senate's role in checks and balances.

 

[Clementine]

In other words:

Legislative terrorism.

Yes and their supporters are perfectly okay with the fact that they are total hypocrites.

 

[Chris]

The filibuster is a stupid rule.

The Senate just got smarter.

 

[BDBoop]

In other words:

Legislative terrorism.

Yes and their supporters are perfectly okay with the fact that they are total hypocrites.

"Bitter, party of two; your table is ready!'

 

[candycorn]

the simple majority is just to move the nominations forward Amelia so they can get an up or down vote. Repubs have filibustered nominees for ages just to vote yes after their obstruction expired. Take your partisan blinders off for once

Acting unilaterally was wrong; the GOP could have done this several times and they didn't. Even when the Dems were doing the same thing.

It just sucks.

In my view, Anyone who doesn't admit this is really not being intellectually honest in this case. From a personal standpoint as a liberal, it disappoints me that fellow liberals are stooping to the level of conservatives who work in intellectual dishonesty the same way some artists work in oils or acrylics...

 

[Chris]

The is a great day for America and democracy.

Elections have consequences.

 

[candycorn]

The filibuster is a stupid rule.

The Senate just got smarter.

Yes but the leaders (including the President) could have gotten together with the current minority and have chosen a date in the future where the rules would be changed and there would be no more filibustering of appointees and neither side would know who would be in power when the rules changed so nobody could claim a benefit/injury to their cause.

To act unilaterally does improve this body but it's the same thing could have happened when the GOP was in power in the Senate and they didn't do it...