Page 7 of 8 FirstFirst ... 5678 LastLast
Results 61 to 70 of 72

Thread: Democrats Poised to Limit Filibusters, Angering G.O.P.

  1. #61
    Guru
    Samhain's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Northern Ohio
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 12:34 PM
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    3,888

    Re: Showdown Nears in Senate Over Filibusters Change

    Quote Originally Posted by ttwtt78640 View Post
    That rule change requires a super majority to end debate on it as well - does it not?
    The Constituation states that the Senate will create and follow its own rules( Article One, Section Five: "Each House may determine the rules of its proceedings" ).

    The Senate rule changes must be debated, hence, any rule change can be held up by a filibuster. However, the majority leader has the option to strike a rule with a simple majority vote.

    I think you end up with circular logic on that, since the option to strike should be governed by the rules, hence, possible to filibuster as well, but that sounds like a Supreme Court Consitutional Crisis if you ask me.

    Now, if one party, or a sub-division of multiple parties, colluded to get the 67 votes, they could pass anything they wanted into the rules to block all legislation but their own. Doubt they would be in office for longer than 1 term, or if they even finished the term, but that's the way it works.

  2. #62
    Sage
    PeteEU's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Denmark
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 02:54 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    29,090

    Re: Showdown Nears in Senate Over Filibusters Change

    Quote Originally Posted by wbcoleman View Post
    My point is simply to refute the notion that the filibuster rule ought to be criticized on the basis of it being "anti-democratic".
    The filibuster rule is not "anti-democratic" per say... the senate version however is, since it does not require the person issuing the filibuster to actually carry out the physical filibuster.
    PeteEU

  3. #63
    Sage

    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Republic of Florida
    Last Seen
    12-15-17 @ 04:48 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    14,040

    Re: Showdown Nears in Senate Over Filibusters Change

    Quote Originally Posted by Deuce View Post
    We wouldn't have a functioning government at that point.
    Yes we would, one whose only functions are the ones we all agreed to, whats in the constitution.

  4. #64
    Sage

    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Republic of Florida
    Last Seen
    12-15-17 @ 04:48 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    14,040

    Re: Showdown Nears in Senate Over Filibusters Change

    Quote Originally Posted by PeteEU View Post
    The filibuster rule is not "anti-democratic" per say... the senate version however is, since it does not require the person issuing the filibuster to actually carry out the physical filibuster.
    Actually it does.

  5. #65
    Sage
    Unitedwestand13's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Sunnyvale California
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 07:46 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    14,985

    Re: Showdown Nears in Senate Over Filibusters Change

    it appears that the senate voted and confirmed Richard cordray as head of the CFPB:

    Richard Cordray confirmation vote to be held soon - POLITICO.com

    cnongradulations, it only took two years since obama nominated him to the job for the senate to actually confirm him.

  6. #66
    Professor
    wbcoleman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Chicago
    Last Seen
    06-07-16 @ 11:22 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    1,833

    Re: Showdown Nears in Senate Over Filibusters Change

    Quote Originally Posted by Samhain View Post
    The Constituation states that the Senate will create and follow its own rules( Article One, Section Five: "Each House may determine the rules of its proceedings" ).

    The Senate rule changes must be debated, hence, any rule change can be held up by a filibuster. However, the majority leader has the option to strike a rule with a simple majority vote.

    I think you end up with circular logic on that, since the option to strike should be governed by the rules, hence, possible to filibuster as well, but that sounds like a Supreme Court Consitutional Crisis if you ask me.

    Now, if one party, or a sub-division of multiple parties, colluded to get the 67 votes, they could pass anything they wanted into the rules to block all legislation but their own. Doubt they would be in office for longer than 1 term, or if they even finished the term, but that's the way it works.
    The problem is that the Senate rules require a 2/3 vote for changes, whilst the nuclear option would change the rules using a simple majority.
    Zionism is the National Liberation Movement of the Jewish People.

  7. #67
    Sage

    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Republic of Florida
    Last Seen
    12-15-17 @ 04:48 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    14,040

    Re: Showdown Nears in Senate Over Filibusters Change

    Quote Originally Posted by Unitedwestand13 View Post
    it appears that the senate voted and confirmed Richard cordray as head of the CFPB:

    Richard Cordray confirmation vote to be held soon - POLITICO.com

    cnongradulations, it only took two years since obama nominated him to the job for the senate to actually confirm him.
    And somehow the country survived, which is proof he wasnt needed.

  8. #68
    Guru
    Samhain's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Northern Ohio
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 12:34 PM
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    3,888

    Re: Showdown Nears in Senate Over Filibusters Change

    Quote Originally Posted by Unitedwestand13 View Post
    it appears that the senate voted and confirmed Richard cordray as head of the CFPB:

    Richard Cordray confirmation vote to be held soon - POLITICO.com

    cnongradulations, it only took two years since obama nominated him to the job for the senate to actually confirm him.
    Redundant Regulatory bodies help how?

  9. #69
    Global Moderator
    Moderator

    Zyphlin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    NoMoAuchie
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    47,998

    Re: Showdown Nears in Senate Over Filibusters Change

    I can't really blame the Democrats for doing it.

    I can't really blame hte Republicans if they keep it if they regain power.

    Personally, I'd like to see it go back to the old style filibuster or none at all personally.

    But it's kind of interesting looking at this in a historical context and seeing the ebbs and flows.

    The first big jump was in 71 through 76 with a Democratic Controlled Senate. The three congresses prior had 7, 6, and 7 cloture motions compared to 24, 44, and 39.

    The next sustained jump was from 83 to 88 with a Republican Controlled Senate. The three congresses prior had 23, 30, 31 motions as opposed to 41, 41, and 54 during that stretch.

    93 to 96 was the high water point, at a point where the start was Democratic Controlled and the end was Republican Controlled, with 80 then 82.

    The cloture motions remained at a higher sustained level than any other previous time, with numbers in the 60's and 70's throughout the late 90's and early 00's when Republicans were in control.

    Then when Democrats gained back control in 2007 the number jumped up once more, 139, 137, and 115. This congress however is at it's quarter mark and is at 29, setting it up for roughly 99 cloture motions.

    So the jump was, unquestionably, a large one and worthy of condemnation. But it's also hardly a new trend that as one party gains power, the other party does a previously unseen amount of sustained fillibustering.

    Some historical perspective...

    From 55 to 80 the Dem's controlled the Senate and there was an average of 15 cloture motions filed per congress.

    From 81-86 the Reps controlled the Senate and there was an average of 38 cloture motions filed. A 153% increase

    From 87 to 94 the Dem's controlled the Senate again and there was an average of 58 cloture motions. A 52% increase

    From 95 to 06 with Rep control we averaged 71 cloture motions. A 22% increase

    From 07 to the estimated end of 14 with a Dem Controlled congress, we're looking to be averaging 123 cloture motions. This would be a 73% increase.

    The numbers have been raising with each power shift, but the increase of that bump varied. The democrats fillibustering of the first Republican controlled Senate in nearly 28 years (and the first multi-term Republican congress in nearly half a century) was the first significant jump coinciding with a change of power. Since that point, the Republicans have had the larger jumps when they've lost power the past two times.

    It definitely appears to be a game of one upsminship. And while I don't necessarily begrude the Republicans (or democrats when and if they lose power) for using everything at their disposal to serve their constituents that sent them to Washington, the number was getting ridiculous and it's good to see it trending downwards a bit.

    All told, it's reached unreasonable levels even before this point and it's just going to continue with a tit for tat type of situation. I would be in favor of seeing some stricter rules...specifically in terms of appointee's to political positiosn AND in terms of forcing the traditional means of fillibustering.

  10. #70
    Sage

    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Republic of Florida
    Last Seen
    12-15-17 @ 04:48 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    14,040

    Re: Showdown Nears in Senate Over Filibusters Change

    Didnt I see you complain once about trying to read someone elses post where that had 100 sentences and no paragraphs?

Page 7 of 8 FirstFirst ... 5678 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •