Skip to main content

View Diary: Dick Durbin speaks of toothless, watered down filibuster reform (163 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  You're reasons are clearly stated: (11+ / 0-)
    The Senate map makes it possible (likely, in my view) to lose the chamber even with a substantial vote majority. And it's not just a standard gerrymander, because the population deviations are Constitutional.
    In other words, something bad might happen in the future, therefore we should curtail our power now. Tis the old "keep the powder dry" Democratic skittishness on the use of power.

    Here's my bottom line: Regardless of what you think might happen in the future, I know that Democrats expanded their majority RIGHT NOW. Regardless of what might happen, we know we've got the power TODAY. And as far as I'm concerned, we need to use it while we have it and worry about tomorrow, tomorrow.

    •  Power to do what? (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      We failed to take back the House, thus mooting this discussion for the time being. I have said when I think we should (or should have) done this. That's hardly a "dry powder" argument. You, OTOH, have not conceded that there could ever be any reason not to do it. You want to burn the powder even if we don't have any shot.

      Ok, so I read the polls.

      by andgarden on Wed Nov 21, 2012 at 05:50:47 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Quite untrue. (18+ / 0-)

        There is judicial crisis going on as we speak. Hundreds of open judgeships that need to be filled. There are literally thousands of presidential appointments across the executive branch that are unfilled.

        And on the legislative front, there are big things that have to be done where we can break the House. We don't need all the Republican votes, just enough with pressure to get a few things done. Like immigration reform. Very important to all those Latino voters who expect us to get something done. Without filibuster reform, Republicans in the Senate will never have to account for killing it. In House, we know we wont have this problem. There is also major tax reform that is on the table and that's vital to have as strong a hand as we can play in Congress. I don't know why anyone would actually CHOOSE to be weak.

        Not to mention possibly 2 Supreme Court appointments. And somebody on the right side of that court might die. They are pretty old. That will give us the opportunity to shift the direction.

        Finally, we can't change the rules midstream as you propose should a court nominee get filibustered. That will require a 2/3rds vote.

        But the most important thing is that the filibuster is doomed regardless. Trust, Republicans will never put up with this bullshit. Never. Would Mitch McConnell actually be thinking to himself "Boy...i'd sure hate it if we lost and Democrats were mean. I'd better not do what I want." No way.

        So I do not understand why we would put up with it.

      •  ever consider using passed senate legislation (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        mightymouse, happymisanthropy

        Held up by the house to drive midterms?

        You have to amp up your base in off years...otherwise, you get drubbed.    

        Enough with being scared of your own shadow.

        "Small Businesses Don't Build Levees" - Melissa Harris Perry

        by justmy2 on Wed Nov 21, 2012 at 09:00:44 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site