Skip to main content

View Diary: Why we need 60 votes for everything, in plain language (68 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  We need real filibusters (10+ / 0-)

    The current filibuster isn't a filibuster at all. Failing a cloture cote doesn't continue debate, it kills the bill. We've seen the results of the current filibuster rules, it leads to gross abuse. The filibuster used to be a seldom used maneuver, now its use has gone up exponentially.

    The current rules make a filibuster cheap. It used to be expensive. When you had to stand up there and debate, you saved the filibuster for when it really mattered. But now that it costs nothing, politicians can use it every single time, and then blame the other party for not getting bills passed.

    When the Republicans were in power, the media told us that a filibuster was evil. As soon as Democrats held the Senate, the media updated its GOP talking points, and declared that it too 60 votes to pass legislation.

    The wolfpack eats venison. The lone wolf eats mice.

    by A Citizen on Wed Dec 15, 2010 at 12:48:43 PM PST

    •  Sometimes you have to let things happen (0+ / 0-)

      There was plenty of times the dems in the Senate could have said, "go ahead and filibuster".  And then allowed the country to see the triviality of the republican position.  Its the lack of brass on the dems part that allowed the repubs to get away with it.  Wasting a week here or there to make a point is not the worst thing.  Particularly if it keeps crappy legislation like the current tax cut stuff from getting anywhere.

      •  Except that the rules were changed some time ago (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        A Citizen

        so that standing and talking continuously was not necessary. It was done at the same time the number of votes needed for cloture was reduced from two-thirds to 60%, making "easier" to invoke cloture. But, in order to allow "the business of the Senate to proceed," they also made it easier to actually filibuster, since no one actually had to stand and maintain the debate continuously. The rulemakers at the time didn't imagine that party discipline in one of the parties would evolve to parlimentarian standards, so that the will of the Party superseded the individual senator's judgement. That is what is unique in American history. The political views and voting records of Republican senators used to be as diverse as the Democrats still are, ranging from social liberal/fiscal moderates like Nelson Rockefeller to the hard-core conservatives. But even the hard-core conservatives of that day would be surprised at how for right the Republicans have gone. Nixon was certainly too liberal to be elected now, and Goldwater probably wouldn't make the grade, either. George H.W. Bush couldn't be nominated today. Even someone pushing the views that Reagan held would be liable to be primaried from the right now.

        -5.12, -5.23

        We are men of action; lies do not become us.

        by ER Doc on Thu Dec 16, 2010 at 12:04:35 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

  • Recommended (145)
  • Community (70)
  • Baltimore (64)
  • Bernie Sanders (49)
  • Freddie Gray (38)
  • Civil Rights (37)
  • Elections (26)
  • Hillary Clinton (26)
  • Culture (24)
  • Racism (23)
  • Labor (20)
  • Education (20)
  • Media (19)
  • Law (19)
  • Economy (18)
  • Rescued (17)
  • Science (16)
  • 2016 (15)
  • Politics (15)
  • Environment (13)
  • Click here for the mobile view of the site