"He who does not think himself worth saving from poverty and ignorance by his own efforts, will hardly be thought worth the efforts of anybody else." -- Frederick Douglass, Self-Made Men (1872)
The filibuster has no Constitutional basis. When it was rarely used, there was no reason to get rid of it. Since half of all the filibusters of executive nominees have happened in the past 5 years, clearly this option has been misused.
Yeah, too bad it is the "more extreme" legislators which are using these filibusters to hamstring the executive.this move will allow government to operate faster, but also in a way which allows those that are more extreme to prevail.
What I would really love to see is a Senate and a Congress where the number one priority was trying to do a good job for the American people and politics was put on the back burner.
Last edited by shrubnose; 11-22-13 at 08:04 AM.
You said, "Reid hasn't passed a budget in years." You were wrong, the senate passed a budget this year.
Senate passes budget
One of the jobs of the executive branch is to make these appointments. It is unacceptable for the legislature to obstruct and thwart this process, regardless of who is in charge.
WRONG.How about a party, let's say the Republicans come 2016 they win the presidency, they already had the house and senate. Now with this nuclear option, no filibuster they could repeal Obamacare....
Filibusters on the legislature have not been removed. The only filibuster they've eliminated is on presidential appointments.
In addition, it's pretty much par for the course for the legislature to be allowed to repeal laws. No one, regardless of party, should be allowed to pass a law that cannot possibly be repealed.
It's very clear that the filibuster on appointees has been thoroughly abused, and does far more harm than good. It's well past time for it to go.That of course if it was used right and enhanced compromise between the two parties.
The liars of the democrat party strike yet again. Obama, Reid, Biden, Feinstein and many more are all on record as having opposed the senate going nuclear. Now, as the usually do, they tell lies why they did it. Just as the many lies of Obamadon'tcare has firmly bit the democrats in the backside this bundle of lies will as well.
But regardless, the hardcore useful idiots that support these liars couldn't care less that the leaders they support have no integrity at all. Reminds me of how the members of the communist party supported the leaders of the USSR.
"“If we don’t deepen our ports all along the Gulf — places like Charleston, South Carolina; or Savannah, Georgia; or Jacksonville, Florida…” -Obama
This has not made Obama less effective; in fact, it's made the executive more effective. He can actually make an appointment, and have it go through.
Please, spare us the hyperbole.It is very possible that Reid won this battle by destroying the senate.
The filibuster has no Constitutional basis; in fact, it has come to thwart the concept of the Senate, by requiring a supermajority for almost every vote. It is only in recent years that filibusters have gone from requiring actual work, to merely putting anonymous holds onto nominees. It's time for this nonsense to go.
I like watching Maddow. She has a number of fiscally conservative views that I can agree with. We differ on many, many things, but I still like watching her. She makes me think. Most times I just laugh, but some times she makes me say "Hmmm" and those are the times that make it worth while to watch.
As for the court appointments? This was a power grab for the DC Circuit since that's the only court (other than SCOTUS) that reviews Congressional actions or hears cases regarding laws passed by Congress.
Yes, there are 93 total vacancies in the courts. Since Obama came to office, the Senate has approved (consented) to 200+ court appointments, so it's not like there haven't been any.
3 of those 93 are in the DC Circuit. Currently, the DC Circuit is balanced, 4 Dems and 4 Reps, and that court is not behind on case load, so there's no need for the other three judges. Rachel talked about the entire federal court being balanced right now, but that isn't the concern. The balance of the DC Circuit is, and should be a concern for all of us.
I wouldn't want the DC Circuit overloaded with either sides appointees. Balance in that court is a good thing.
There are other circuits that ARE behind in case load, and need appointments. And those should have been the focus since the balance of those courts is not as critical, if critical at all.
This whole thing has been coming to a head for over a decade. Both parties have obstructed the other when they were in the minority. Dems and Reps. It's what has become the normal in DC.
Personally, I prefer to have the filibuster, no matter which party is in power. It forces the majority party to slow down, get consensus from at least some to the minority, and makes for a more deliberate and thought out process.