Skip to main content

View Diary: Call a waaahbulance for Senate Republicans: UPDATED (86 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  There is the effort not to promote misnomers, of (7+ / 0-)

    course, but even more importantly, if it were necessary to maintain a filibuster with 40 votes, then the minority would need to be present and compliant at all times to obstruct each order of business, since a vote for cloture can be called for at any point in time.

    Keep the chamber in session and the minority would be held captive to their own devices.  

    There is a huge difference between a filibuster that needs to be actively maintained, as opposed to being an act of passive aggression, as it is.  

    That's not even not mention (again) the level of accountability that would be evident if each obstructing member of the Senate would have to list his name next to each vote keeping business from happening.

    The differences are, again, significant.  Palpable.  Real.

    Righteousness is a wide path. Self-righteousness is a bullhorn and a blindfold.

    by Murphoney on Fri Dec 13, 2013 at 08:06:44 AM PST

    [ Parent ]

    •  Yep (8+ / 0-)

      There was a brief campaign here on dKos to move filibuster reform in that direction.  I liked the idea - I thought it was simple, preserved the filibuster, but would nonetheless serve as a deterrent.

      I think requiring 41 votes to filibuster, and requiring a senator to hold the floor like in the olden days, would basically solve the problem.

      The reason they haven't done either one is because they know that this would effectively end it; they're all too busy fundraising to commit themselves this way.  But I say anything that is so damn important that the minority feels the need to block it should require that kind of sacrifice.

      "Mediocrity cannot know excellence." -- Sherlock Holmes

      by La Gitane on Fri Dec 13, 2013 at 08:51:12 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  in the end, it makes too much sense. (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        La Gitane, ColoTim, Calamity Jean

        can't have that.

        Righteousness is a wide path. Self-righteousness is a bullhorn and a blindfold.

        by Murphoney on Fri Dec 13, 2013 at 08:56:15 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  While I see the merit in the proposal... (0+ / 0-)

        (Although I personally feel the filibuster should be abolished, as it was in the House...)

        41 votes to mantain the filibuster is completely disconnected from the principal behind a filibuster.  It is not, and never was, about minority rights, or the rights of a minority party.  Ignore the politicans that do that kind of bleating.  

        The idea of the filibuster is that ANY ONE Senator can hold forth on a topic for as long as they want.  The freedom to debate.  And that freedom has to be affirmateively removed.  

        So the default rule is preservation of a Senator's perogative.  Then, when a super-majority of the Senate agrees enough is enough, the Senator loses that perogative, and debate ends (cloture).  

        The 41 vote requirement would be an end to that perogative - it wouldn't be freestanding, but something that would depend on finding 40 like minded other Senators.  So I think it's an unpalatable compromise, because it's actually the stealth elimination of the filibuster.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

  • Recommended (146)
  • Community (68)
  • Elections (34)
  • Media (33)
  • Trans-Pacific Partnership (31)
  • Environment (30)
  • 2016 (29)
  • Law (28)
  • Civil Rights (27)
  • Culture (27)
  • Science (24)
  • Barack Obama (24)
  • Hillary Clinton (24)
  • Climate Change (23)
  • Republicans (23)
  • Labor (22)
  • Marriage Equality (19)
  • Economy (19)
  • Josh Duggar (18)
  • Jeb Bush (18)
  • Click here for the mobile view of the site