Skip to main content

View Diary: Dan Coats Supports Filibuster Reform (33 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •   (0+ / 0-)

    Dems ought to end the filibuster. (60+ / 0-)

    Recommended by:
       cdreid, MadRuth, ferg, askew, SlowNomad, mrblifil, ctsteve, gmb, maybeeso in michigan, marina, Paul Goodman, basquebob, Brooke In Seattle, reflectionsv37, Pam from Calif, John DE, Ice Blue, mozlover, peacestpete, grada3784, begone, Naniboujou, Wary, greenearth, AllanTBG, TheUnknown285, bear83, arodb, FishOutofWater, jayden, snowshoeblue, yella dawg, madgranny, Badabing, sable, cville townie, pamelabrown, icebergslim, bakenjuddy, psilocynic, 1BQ, J M F, JesseCW, wmdrpa, Losty, Nonconformist, Livvy5, Jyrinx, blueyescryinintherain, DrFitz, sfcouple, Mistral Wind, Liberal Lass, Dixie Liberal, LiLaF, nutbutter, SaintC, We Won, halful, PeakRaider

    Period. They filibuster only things that would have been considered a reasonable filibuster 5 years ago.

    by randomfacts on Thu Feb 04, 2010 at 09:58:49 PM EDT

    •  yup (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      Period. They filibuster only things that would have been considered a reasonable filibuster 5 years ago.

      If Dems abused the filibuster and other Senate rules like the GOP abused it in 2009-10, then yes the GOP could reform. But I doubt that's going to happen. Dems are too reasonable.

      •  Which begs the question. (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:

        Is the filibuster a general good which needs retaining or tweaking, a general evil which needs to be gotten rid of, or a short term tactical issue?

        •  the issue is balance between (0+ / 0-)

          two democratic principles that go back to the 18th century: majority rule vs. minority rights. Even though the rules have changed, the general outlines of this balance have persisted. For example, in the 19th century all it took to mount a filibuster was one single, solitary Senator. But this did not impede the working of the Senate because filibusters were so rare. What matters is not the specific rule but to preserve the checks and balances of the Senate while still allowing it to work. When minority Senators launch multiple anonymous holds for no reason that grinds the Senate to a halt, then rule changes are called for. But if minority Senators are using their perogatives responsibly, then the majority should respect the rules. It is not a very fine line but it is a clear principle.

      •  Unfortunately Democrats are too concerned with (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:

        actually governing than power plays like the Republicans.

        It's a sad place to live in an upside down political system, but that's the reality of things.

        As for a Dem Senate majority, count on Ben Nelson and Lieberman to stab us in the back.

        HylasBrook @62 - fiesty, fiery, and fierce

        by HylasBrook on Fri Nov 05, 2010 at 06:54:47 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site