Skip to main content

View Diary: Frist to change Senate filibuster rules (137 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  er (none)
    that all filibusters are merely threats to filibuster.

    Not really. Here's a link that says a cloture vote was taken as recently as April 2003. Guess a filibuster of sorts was on at the time.

    Yes, the senate usually doesn't waste time having people stand and talk for hours. That's the idea of filibustering, to get the majority party to move on.

    And my original point is that blue slips were common to achieve concessions from one party or another and so to say filibustering is a recent phenomenon is disingenuous. What's recent is the republicans forcing the filibuster to actually take place in order to score a political point.

    •  Aren't blue slips different? (none)
      Appointments to district courts in say, California, have to pass muster with the senators from California.

      I don't think anyone could blue slip a SCOTUS nomination.

      •  Repugs stopped allowing blue slips (none)
        That's why the Dems are resorting to so many filibusters. I think it was Hatch that changed the informal Senate rule that allowed Senators to blue slip nominees from their own state. There ain't no such beast anymore.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site