Skip to main content

View Diary: Harry Reid working on plan to reform filibuster (125 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Correct me if I'm wrong, here, but... (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    emal, verasoie, fizziks, elgringoviejo

    ...wouldn't doing this NOW prevent Democrats from being able to filibuster damaging GOP bills in the new Congress?

    May the forces of evil become confused on the way to your house.

    by dasheight on Thu Dec 23, 2010 at 01:46:14 PM PST

    •  Spot On (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      emal, verasoie

      This would seem to be a time when repealing the filibuster would inure to the Republicans' advantage.

    •  Filibusters can still happen. (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Palafox, CalliopeIrjaPearl

      They just have to really have one, instead of "threaten" one, in order to stop legislation.

      IMO, it's either wrong or right, and that isn't relative to which party is in power at the time.

      Donk is a poker term for someone who is really bad at "the game". Still, a poor choice in name I guess.

      by DonkSlayer on Thu Dec 23, 2010 at 01:48:33 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  it is relative to which party is in the majority (0+ / 0-)

        Our ideas are mostly correct, and theirs are largely wrong.  

        So the filibuster is right if it is used to thwart right wing policies, and not right if it is used to thward liberal policies.  

        •  No, I meant the fake filibuster. (0+ / 0-)

          The one where no one really filibusters, but merely threatens to and thus locks legislation up.

          Donk is a poker term for someone who is really bad at "the game". Still, a poor choice in name I guess.

          by DonkSlayer on Thu Dec 23, 2010 at 08:44:30 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

    •  Currently Dems don't need to filiibuster (2+ / 0-)

      They have a Majority in the Seante.  Without the filibuster, they have enough votes to do what ever they want in the Seanate.  The just have to get through the house.

      This mean instead of negotiating with the left most Republicans, you would be talking to the 4 or 5 most conseravtive Democract as to what was needed for their vote.  The right edge of the Democract cacus would have no voice.

      All they would need is 50 Senators to pass legislation and appointments (Biden breaks ties).

      They could fill the federal bench in an afternoon ...

      My I find the strength to do the things I already know need to be done.

      by Edge PA on Thu Dec 23, 2010 at 01:52:48 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  You're (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Palafox

      assuming that the Democrats have any sort of political will.

      This is unwarranted.

      Dems have let Republicans walk all over them (with the filibuster as a sorry-ass, weak, apolitical excuse) for years and years.  

      When the table turns does that somehow mean that the Dems will suddenly grow some and begin to amount to something?

      No.  These Dems wouldn't filibuster a damn thing because they don't have the will for any sort of oppositional politics.

      You can bank they will come up with all kinds of excuses for not filibustering when it's their turn, and the that Dem wonk librul blogosphere will quickly admit to the politicking necessity of same.

      Please don't feed the security state.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site