http://gamingtrend.com
September 02, 2014, 02:35:45 AM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News:
 
   Home   Help Search Calendar Login Register  
Pages: [1]   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Harry Reid Leaning Toward Filibuster Reform Vote This Week  (Read 684 times)
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
CeeKay
Gaming Trend Staff
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 71766


La-bibbida-bibba-dum! La-bibbida-bibba-do!


View Profile
« on: November 20, 2013, 06:36:41 PM »

mah nah nah nah....

Quote
It's looking more and more likely that Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) isn't just ready for filibuster reform, but he's ready to do it this week.

A senior Democratic aide told The Huffington Post on Wednesday that there's "a greater possibility" that Reid will hold a vote this week instead of waiting until after the Senate comes back from recess in December. The proposal that Reid is planning to put on the floor would strip the minority of its ability to filibuster executive and judicial nominees, but wouldn't apply to Supreme Court nominees.

Even Democrats who previously resisted changing filibuster rules through the "nuclear option" -- that is, through the use of arcane Senate procedures to change the rules with just 51 votes instead of the standard two-thirds majority vote -- say they've had it with the GOP obstruction of President Barack Obama's nominees and are ready to go nuclear. Sens. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) and Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.) both flipped positions on Tuesday.

It's still not clear if Reid has the 51 votes to make the change, but it certainly looks close. There are 55 Democrats in total, which means Reid can lose up to four. HuffPost tracked down a number of Democrats on Tuesday to see who remains opposed to making the change, and only one, Sen. Carl Levin (D-Mich.), gave a definitive no. A couple of others, Sens. Max Baucus (D-Mont.) and Claire McCaskill (D-Mo.), avoided answering the question altogether.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/11/20/harry-reid-filibuster-reform_n_4310068.html?utm_hp_ref=politics
Logged

Because I can,
also because I don't care what you want.
XBL: OriginalCeeKay
Wii U: CeeKay
CeeKay
Gaming Trend Staff
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 71766


La-bibbida-bibba-dum! La-bibbida-bibba-do!


View Profile
« Reply #1 on: November 22, 2013, 05:01:07 PM »

Nuclear Fallout: The Real-World Consequences Of Senate Filibuster Reform

Quote
When Harry Reid came in through a side door to the Mansfield Room Thursday afternoon, the majority leader was met with a raucous standing ovation from a crowd of activists, mere steps from the Senate floor where he had just successfully led a change of Senate rules to reform the filibuster.

When he took the podium, the crowd rose again, giving a reception that would have been unthinkable a decade ago, when Reid was considered by many progressives to be a weak-kneed centrist. His journey to filibuster reform has been just as long. A longtime, strident defender of Senate tradition, Reid worked in the last Congress against the efforts of Sens. Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.), Tom Harkin (D-Iowa) and Tom Udall (D-N.M.) to change the rules and reform the filibuster. It earned him his fair share of unfavorable coverage in the pages of this outlet and elsewhere. "I was the one who always had to tell Senator Reid The Huffington Post was banging him up for not pulling the trigger," recalled Jim Manley, Reid's former communications director, after the trigger was finally pulled.

Reid told the crowd in the Mansfield Room, named for former Democratic Senate Majority Leader Mike Mansfield, that he always knew the reformers had been right in pushing for a rules change, but he didn't want to admit it to himself. And, he added, he didn't have the votes to do it.

A little more than an hour before the Mansfield gathering, Reid found the votes: 52-48, eliminating the ability of the Senate minority to filibuster executive branch nominees and any judgeship below the Supreme Court.
Logged

Because I can,
also because I don't care what you want.
XBL: OriginalCeeKay
Wii U: CeeKay
Scraper
Gaming Trend Staff
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 3909



View Profile
« Reply #2 on: November 22, 2013, 05:06:58 PM »

That's great but what are the Dems going to do when Republicans hold the majority? I suspect they will be asking themselves WTF were we thinking?
Logged

" And they are a strong and frightening force, impervious to, and immunized against, the feeble lance of mere reason." Isaac Asimov
brettmcd
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 1355


View Profile
« Reply #3 on: November 22, 2013, 07:52:27 PM »

Quote from: Scraper on November 22, 2013, 05:06:58 PM

That's great but what are the Dems going to do when Republicans hold the majority? I suspect they will be asking themselves WTF were we thinking?

They will use the lame duck session before they actually lose control to put the rule back in.
Logged
Alefroth
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 685



View Profile
« Reply #4 on: November 22, 2013, 08:30:46 PM »

Quote from: Scraper on November 22, 2013, 05:06:58 PM

That's great but what are the Dems going to do when Republicans hold the majority? I suspect they will be asking themselves WTF were we thinking?

Shouldn't affect them as they didn't really try to block every nomination for no reason in the past.
Logged
Canuck
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 5453


I live in Japan


View Profile
« Reply #5 on: November 23, 2013, 12:20:41 AM »

Quote from: brettmcd on November 22, 2013, 07:52:27 PM

Quote from: Scraper on November 22, 2013, 05:06:58 PM

That's great but what are the Dems going to do when Republicans hold the majority? I suspect they will be asking themselves WTF were we thinking?

They will use the lame duck session before they actually lose control to put the rule back in.
So, some time in the 22nd century at this rate?
Logged
Ironrod
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Online Online

Posts: 3389



View Profile WWW
« Reply #6 on: November 23, 2013, 02:36:35 AM »

Quote from: Canuck on November 23, 2013, 12:20:41 AM

Quote from: brettmcd on November 22, 2013, 07:52:27 PM

Quote from: Scraper on November 22, 2013, 05:06:58 PM

That's great but what are the Dems going to do when Republicans hold the majority? I suspect they will be asking themselves WTF were we thinking?

They will use the lame duck session before they actually lose control to put the rule back in.
So, some time in the 22nd century at this rate?
Never underestimate the Democrats' ability to screw up a sure thing.
Logged

Curio City Online - Weird stuff you can buy
Curious Business - The Curio City Blog
brettmcd
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 1355


View Profile
« Reply #7 on: November 23, 2013, 04:24:12 AM »

You don't need to wait that long, the Dems could lose the Senate in 2014.
Logged
ATB
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 15372


Thanks for everything, Ryan. 1979-2013


View Profile
« Reply #8 on: November 23, 2013, 05:45:06 AM »

No outrage at this?

What if the repubs had done it?
Logged
Canuck
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 5453


I live in Japan


View Profile
« Reply #9 on: November 23, 2013, 06:05:25 AM »

Quote from: ATB on November 23, 2013, 05:45:06 AM

No outrage at this?

What if the repubs had done it?
Unfortunately the Republicans apparently never learned the rule that if you abuse your toys then they're going to be taken away.
Logged
Ironrod
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Online Online

Posts: 3389



View Profile WWW
« Reply #10 on: November 23, 2013, 07:07:27 AM »

Quote from: ATB on November 23, 2013, 05:45:06 AM

No outrage at this?

What if the repubs had done it?

If the dems had been blocking their president's nominees for purely political reasons, I'd be ok with that. Neither party should be able to obstruct just for the sake of obstruction.

By using the "nuclear option", though, the dems are inviting the reps to do the same the next time they take the senate. If the reps feel justified in ending the filibuster altogether, then the dems just gave them the power to overturn the ACA. Math favors the reps taking the senate next year.

So narrowly speaking I don't have any problem with it. Broadly speaking, putting the rules in play is a big mistake.
Logged

Curio City Online - Weird stuff you can buy
Curious Business - The Curio City Blog
Freezer-TPF-
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 1372


First in war and peace, second in the NL East.


View Profile
« Reply #11 on: November 23, 2013, 02:52:28 PM »

The Republicans were going to do it anyway as soon they got the Senate votes to do so.  When the Rs last controlled the Senate, they told the Ds that if they dared to use the filibuster it would be taken away from them.  Oops...

Besides, this does not include actual legislation or SC nominees.  That would truly be a "nuclear" gamechanger, as the breathless press loves to say. 
Logged

Signature on file at the county clerk's office.
Autistic Angel
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 3613


View Profile
« Reply #12 on: November 23, 2013, 03:20:31 PM »

Quote from: ATB on November 23, 2013, 05:45:06 AM

No outrage at this?

What if the repubs had done it?


I'm not sure what question you're asking.

If you're wondering whether there would be outrage if modern day Republicans suddenly voted en masse to strip away their own ability to filibuster presidential appointments for no reason, I think Conservative voters would be absolutely livid.  These Republicans were elected on an open platform of generating gridlock, rejecting all compromise, and absolutely blocking every action President Obama tries to take.  Giving up one of the main obstruction tools would guarantee they'd be primaried by challengers even further to the Right.

Or are you wondering about the outrage level if we lived in an alternate dimension where Democrats had spent half a decade abusing parliamentary procedures to frustrate a Republican president -- repeatedly wounding the national economy in the process -- and now a Republican majority was finally taking steps to reinstate a minimal level of governmental functionality?  In that case, I'd point out that people in such a universe would say "goodbye" when they arrived, "hello" when they left, and that "outrage" would be a synonym for "euphoric indifference."  It would also be against the law.

-Autistic Angel
Logged
pr0ner
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 5357


Go Flames go!


View Profile
« Reply #13 on: November 23, 2013, 06:42:34 PM »

You'd think the Democrats could at least get a spell checker when touting what they've done.

Logged

XBox Live Gamertag: Pr0ner
Rip
Gaming Trend Reader

Offline Offline

Posts: 405


View Profile WWW
« Reply #14 on: November 23, 2013, 07:47:11 PM »

Quote from: Autistic Angel on November 23, 2013, 03:20:31 PM

Quote from: ATB on November 23, 2013, 05:45:06 AM

No outrage at this?

What if the repubs had done it?


I'm not sure what question you're asking.

If you're wondering whether there would be outrage if modern day Republicans suddenly voted en masse to strip away their own ability to filibuster presidential appointments for no reason, I think Conservative voters would be absolutely livid.  These Republicans were elected on an open platform of generating gridlock, rejecting all compromise, and absolutely blocking every action President Obama tries to take.  Giving up one of the main obstruction tools would guarantee they'd be primaried by challengers even further to the Right.

Or are you wondering about the outrage level if we lived in an alternate dimension where Democrats had spent half a decade abusing parliamentary procedures to frustrate a Republican president -- repeatedly wounding the national economy in the process -- and now a Republican majority was finally taking steps to reinstate a minimal level of governmental functionality?  In that case, I'd point out that people in such a universe would say "goodbye" when they arrived, "hello" when they left, and that "outrage" would be a synonym for "euphoric indifference."  It would also be against the law.

-Autistic Angel

Well there is one thing that can be confirmed without the need of Congress. That you are obtuse.

 thumbsdown
Logged
hepcat
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 9216


I'M the one that knocks! Now...burp me!


View Profile
« Reply #15 on: December 03, 2013, 04:41:43 PM »

My takeaway is that you didn't actually read his reply due to its length.
Logged

Warning:  You will see my penis. -Brian

Just remember: once a user figures out gluten noting them they're allowed to make fun of you. - Ceekay speaking in tongues.
Pages: [1]   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines
Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.083 seconds with 55 queries. (Pretty URLs adds 0.016s, 2q)