• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Senate approves nuclear option

vesper said:
I don't think it delusional to think the base of the party would be in favor of restoring the rules, can't speak for the rest of them. But what the Republican party could do right now is everything that Reid brings up for a vote is use the filibuster rules still in place for all other legislation, to make the left work real hard to pass anymore legislation. It may force ole Harry to invoke another nuclear option or force Obama to reach for his pen quite frequently to sign another Executive Order bypassing Congress altogether. Both tactics showing abuse of powers.

Wasn't it Lindsey Graham that vowed to filibuster any Obama appointee until the White House was willing to release all the documents pertaining to Benghazi? Looks like ole Harry snuffed out Graham's candle.
Click to expand...

Mornin Vesper.
hat.gif
Yes Graham did.....now he will have to go round about and call for more Senate hearings.

The other issue with this......is now the Democrats will be able to fill all those seats on the Labor Board. The big concern was the Appellate. Although.....now the Republicans will only be able to delay and stall at a minimum.
 
MMC said:
Mornin Vesper.
hat.gif
Yes Graham did.....now he will have to go round about and call for more Senate hearings.

The other issue with this......is now the Democrats will be able to fill all those seats on the Labor Board. The big concern was the Appellate. Although.....now the Republicans will only be able to delay and stall at a minimum.
Click to expand...

I see it as nothing more than the Democrats rubber stamping all of Obama's nominees. And their biggest focus is on packing a crucial circuit court that often serves as a stepping stone toward the Supreme Court.
 
I think this is a really day period for America. A great strength I always thought was that here you could not have " Tyranny of the Majority".

I really thought it was hogwash when people said that Obama wanted to tear down America, but I guess I was naive.
 
SayMyName said:
Great point....Thank you. Then, the Democrats do have the Constitutional authority to do exactly what they are doing now. The Republicans should take note for the future. The section noted gives to each house the power to determine the rules of its proceedings.
Click to expand...

Yep, they have the authority to do it. The point is that there have been filibusters since the very first congress, but now we have this maneuver by Reid and Obama to get rid of it in this case. One has to wonder what they they are really up to. The DC court has a low workload and doesn't even need these judges.

Also note that these appointments must be so terrible that the dems can't get any support for them. With the filibuster, they only need a handful of republican votes, not the entire minority. They weren't even able to pick off a few RINO's to get these people through.
 
vesper said:
I don't think it delusional to think the base of the party would be in favor of restoring the rules, can't speak for the rest of them. But what the Republican party could do right now is everything that Reid brings up for a vote is use the filibuster rules still in place for all other legislation, to make the left work real hard to pass anymore legislation. It may force ole Harry to invoke another nuclear option or force Obama to reach for his pen quite frequently to sign another Executive Order bypassing Congress altogether. Both tactics showing abuse of powers.

Wasn't it Lindsey Graham that vowed to filibuster any Obama nominee until the White House was willing to release all the documents pertaining to Benghazi? Looks like ole Harry snuffed out Graham's candle.
Click to expand...

Well, if the dems lose the Senate, they'll probably change the rule back before they go, then scream the republicans are destroying the senate if they do the same!
 
vesper said:
I don't think it delusional to think the base of the party would be in favor of restoring the rules, can't speak for the rest of them. But what the Republican party could do right now is everything that Reid brings up for a vote is use the filibuster rules still in place for all other legislation, to make the left work real hard to pass anymore legislation. It may force ole Harry to invoke another nuclear option or force Obama to reach for his pen quite frequently to sign another Executive Order bypassing Congress altogether. Both tactics showing abuse of powers.

Wasn't it Lindsey Graham that vowed to filibuster any Obama nominee until the White House was willing to release all the documents pertaining to Benghazi? Looks like ole Harry snuffed out Graham's candle.
Click to expand...

I don't think there is a need to filibuster much legislation in the senate. Speaker Boehner can just do what Senator Reid has done with most legislation coming from the house since the Republicans took over, just table it and never bring it up for a vote. Talk about a lot of DOA legislative action going on.

Yep, Graham is now snuffed out. Now no one will know if there was really a there there or not. Let the conspiracy theories abound. I am not a big Benghazi theorist on there being a there there, but until one of the survivors gives a TV interview or something, the possibility will always exist in the back of my mind. I know how the government likes to hide things from the American Public having taken part in some. Somethings they don't care if even the other know about it, just as long as Americans don't and congress is included in that at times.

I have to admit the D.C. court of appeals will now be very friendly to the president and his agenda, 7-4 it will be democrat appointees vs. republican ones and the new labor board will be very pro union and anti business. But that is life.
 
vesper said:
I see it as nothing more than the Democrats rubber stamping all of Obama's nominees. And their biggest focus is on packing a crucial circuit court that often serves as a stepping stone toward the Supreme Court.
Click to expand...

Well.....maybe the next Republican President can remove any appointed by Obama, that's what I would do. Using that Obama tactic and his quote......I have lost confidence in them and their abilities.

This is another reason why Judges should be elected.....and there should be no lifetime appointments. Moreover......life should be made difficult for any of them over 65. Wherein they should be psychologically evaluated every 3 years. check out those mental faculties, memory, and their medical.

Any holding a bipolar classification. Should be removed immediately from that Seat and from Holding Such a Title.
 
Anthony60 said:
Well, if the dems lose the Senate, they'll probably change the rule back before they go, then scream the republicans are destroying the senate if they do the same!
Click to expand...

It is possible, but I doubt it. The tooth paste is out of the tube and there is no putting it back. If anything it will be expanded and at sometime in the future the whole filibuster thing will be wiped out and done away with. The senate has just completed their transformation from being a body intended to represent the states to just another House of Representatives, a body of the people who just represent their political parties and not really the people. I wonder how much longer the electoral college will stand, we are moving pretty quickly to becoming more of a direct democracy instead of a republic. Where 50% plus one will rule and have total say over the 50% minus one.
 
MMC said:
Well.....maybe the next Republican President can remove any appointed by Obama, that's what I would do. Using that Obama tactic and his quote......I have lost confidence in them and their abilities.

This is another reason why Judges should be elected.....and there should be no lifetime appointments. Moreover......life should be made difficult for any of them over 65. Wherein they should be psychologically evaluated every 3 years. check out those mental faculties, memory, and their medical.

Any holding a bipolar classification. Should be removed immediately from that Seat and from Holding Such a Title.
Click to expand...

Congress does have the power to impeach federally appointed judges!. Don't quote me but I believe it is in Article III. I never understood why they haven't hauled in some on the bench of the 9th Circus by now for their many questionable interpretations of the law and legislating from the bench!
 
Perotista said:
It is possible, but I doubt it. The tooth paste is out of the tube and there is no putting it back. If anything it will be expanded and at sometime in the future the whole filibuster thing will be wiped out and done away with. The senate has just completed their transformation from being a body intended to represent the states to just another House of Representatives, a body of the people who just represent their political parties and not really the people. I wonder how much longer the electoral college will stand, we are moving pretty quickly to becoming more of a direct democracy instead of a republic. Where 50% plus one will rule and have total say over the 50% minus one.
Click to expand...

The toothpaste can be put back into the tube with a syringe. It isn't too late to restore things. It just takes We the People willing to send those to Washington that will take on the task.
 
vesper said:
The toothpaste can be put back into the tube with a syringe. It isn't too late to restore things. It just takes We the People willing to send those to Washington that will take on the task.
Click to expand...

But we the people are not willing to do that. Hence we get the government we deserve.
 
Perotista said:
But we the people are not willing to do that. Hence we get the government we deserve.
Click to expand...

Stop sounding like a defeatist and get busy changing minds!
 
vesper said:
Congress does have the power to impeach federally appointed judges!. Don't quote me but I believe it is in Article III. I never understood why they haven't hauled in some on the bench of the 9th Circus by now for their many questionable interpretations of the law and legislating from the bench!
Click to expand...

Oh, I am all for that and not just that Court. Any Judges.....and all that believe in the fanaticism of the Man Made LAW.

Since they like to stand on law.....then let the law stand on them. Moreover......if caught into anything nefarious. Then sufferage must be greater than they over whom they rule. Examples must be made of them publically and for ALL those Politicians to see and take notice.


Still.....IMO this will hurt the Democrats and then maybe some of them will find their backbone and stand up to Reid and the Progressives. Bout time they start letting Reid hear it and feel it.
 
vesper said:
If the Senate on a partisan vote change the rules to avoid filibusters on judges, the next majority can use the same tactics in repealing Obamacare, passing a Balanced Budget Amendment and anything else they want to put out there.
Click to expand...
Yes, I'm sure you care deeply about the tactical implications for the Democrats.

If things have any chance of turning out as you say, then again I ask... Why are the Republicans up in arms about this? Why aren't they looking forward to eliminating Obamacare in just a few short years?
 
MMC said:
Well, I wasn't talking about when the Republicans wanted to do it.....and now as you say. It's the Democrats turn. So they are doing it.....alone. Just like they produced Obamacare.....alone.
Click to expand...
I'm sorry, I'm not following you here.

You implied with a linked cartoon that Reid was assaulting the Constitution by getting rid of the filibuster. I linked to several prominent conservatives who, as recently as 2005, were pointing out (correctly) that the filibuster has no basis in the Constitution, that presidential nominees deserve an up-or-down vote. Several of those same conservatives are exploding in fury because Reid did what they suggested 8 years ago. What's changed since then? (Hint: It isn't the Constitution.)


Myself, I think they need to come up with a different method of filling in Appointments, as long as it remains Constitutional. Judicial or any others.
Click to expand...
The Constitution is very clear that it is the President's job to make appointments, and the Senate's to advise and consent. As usual, it's an elegant solution, as it gives both the executive and legislative branches influence over the judiciary.

The problem is not that "the president makes appointments." It's that the minority in the Senate is abusing its duty, and instead of performing oversight they are obstructing the process.
 
vesper said:
what the Republican party could do right now is everything that Reid brings up for a vote is use the filibuster rules still in place for all other legislation, to make the left work real hard to pass anymore legislation....
Click to expand...
They're pretty much already doing this.


It may force ole Harry to invoke another nuclear option or force Obama to reach for his pen quite frequently to sign another Executive Order bypassing Congress altogether. Both tactics showing abuse of powers.
Click to expand...
No, they aren't.

Reid cannot arbitrarily change the Senate rules; it requires a vote. The President can only act within the confines of laws already passed; issuing executive orders is part of what the executive branch does.

That said, since you are so deeply concerned about these alleged abuses, if the Republicans get a majority in the Senate, will you push them to restore the filibuster rules?
 
MMC said:
Well.....maybe the next Republican President can remove any appointed by Obama, that's what I would do.
Click to expand...
The only way to remove a judicial appointment is via impeachment. FYI, Jefferson tried to root out a whole bunch of Federalist judges that way, and it didn't fly.

It's also perfectly normal for an incoming president to replace department heads, as he sees fit.


This is another reason why Judges should be elected.....and there should be no lifetime appointments.
Click to expand...
Electing judges is a terrible idea. The purpose of appointments is not only to remove judges from short-term political gain (by a step, at least), it's to ensure they can go against the other branches without fear that they'll lose their jobs.


Moreover......life should be made difficult for any of them over 65. Wherein they should be psychologically evaluated every 3 years. check out those mental faculties, memory, and their medical.
Click to expand...
Uh huh. You do realize this would mean that (for example) Obama would be able to pack the Supreme Court, yes?
 
Perotista said:
If anything it will be expanded and at sometime in the future the whole filibuster thing will be wiped out and done away with.
Click to expand...
Or, get it permanently restored to talking filibusters. We can only hope.


The senate has just completed their transformation from being a body intended to represent the states to just another House of Representatives...
Click to expand...
Uh huh. Did you not notice how the filibuster has no Constitutional basis? How its use has dramatically escalated? How Senators have been directly elected for decades?

And yet again: The Constitution stipulates that the Senate is supposed to decide based on a simple majority, not a supermajority, with a handful of exceptions. This is taking a step towards the original intent of the Senate, not away from it.


I wonder how much longer the electoral college will stand
Click to expand...
We can only dream of eliminating that obsolete appendage of the colonial era.


we are moving pretty quickly to becoming more of a direct democracy instead of a republic. Where 50% plus one will rule and have total say over the 50% minus one.
Click to expand...
Uh, yeah, "elected representatives passing legislature with a simple majority" is not, by definition, a "direct democracy."

The US will probably get a little more democratic in some respects. But I see little indication that we're going to have national referendums on a regular basis.
 
Visbek said:
The only way to remove a judicial appointment is via impeachment. FYI, Jefferson tried to root out a whole bunch of Federalist judges that way, and it didn't fly.

It's also perfectly normal for an incoming president to replace department heads, as he sees fit.



Electing judges is a terrible idea. The purpose of appointments is not only to remove judges from short-term political gain (by a step, at least), it's to ensure they can go against the other branches without fear that they'll lose their jobs.



Uh huh. You do realize this would mean that (for example) Obama would be able to pack the Supreme Court, yes?
Click to expand...

Yeah they can replace department heads. But there should be a requirement that they have some background in that position.

Prime example would be Susan Rice being Put at the Head of the NSA and the Physical Security of this country.

I didn't see it that way.....as if they are classified as bi-polar, or have dementia, and or ALS. I would think that would remove quite a bit of those liberal and progressive judges from the bench. Especially all those Bi-polar and ADD ones.
 
More info as to why Sen. Reid pulled the nuclear option trigger can be found in this memo. It's why I said in my post #647 the more people learn why this happened and the parameters around this rule change, the more it will begin to make sense. Again, contrary to what's being reported the filibuster has NOT been removed; it can still be used during normal order. It just can't be used to stymie nominations for presidential appointments or nominations to the lower courts.
 
Visbek said:
You do realize this would mean that (for example) Obama would be able to pack the Supreme Court, yes?
Click to expand...

No, he cannot. You've been listening to too much talk radio my friend.

The rule change does NOT apply to Supreme Court nominations. Read the memo I linked to above to learn more.
 
vesper said:
Stop sounding like a defeatist and get busy changing minds!
Click to expand...

I have been trying to change peoples minds since I first started campaigning for Perot back in 1992.
 
ItAin'tFree said:
Some of them understand what you are getting at. But the truth holds no value to the Democrat lie. So they will keep on repeating the lies the leadership of the Democrat party keeps telling.
Click to expand...

True. By another obstructionist metric. As of 02/23/10, but the list is probably longer now.
1) H.R. 12, Paycheck Fairness Act
2) H.R. 20, Melanie Blocker Stokes Mom’s Opportunity to Access Health, Education, Research, and Support for Postpartum Depression Act
3) H.R. 22, U.S. Postal Service Financial Relief Act
4) H.R. 23, Belated Thank You to the Merchant Mariners of World War II Act
5) H.R. 24, Redesignating Department of Navy as Department of Navy and Marine Corps
6) H.R. 31, Lumbee Recognition Act
7) H.R. 35, Presidential Records Act Amendments
8) H.R. 36, Presidential Library Donation Reform Act
9) H.R. 44, Guam World War II Loyalty Recognition Act
10) H.R. 46, Family Self Sufficiency Act
11) H.R. 80, Captive Primate Safety Act
12) H.R. 81, Shark Conservation Act
13) H.R. 86, Regarding California Coastal National Monument
14) H.R. 118, Regarding Morristown National Historical Park
15) H.R. 129, Conveying Certain National Forest System Lands in Los Padres National Forest in California
16) H.R. 151, Daniel Webster Congressional Clerkship Act
17) H.R. 174, Establishing a national cemetery for veterans in the southern Colorado region
18) H.R. 310, HALE Scouts Act
19) H.R. 320, CJ’s Home Protection Act
20) H.R. 325, Avra/Black Wash Reclamation and Riparian Restoration Project
21) H.R. 326, Cocopah Lands Act
22) H.R. 347, Congressional Gold Medal for 100th Infantry Battalion in World War II
23) H.R. 388, Crane Conservation Act
24) H.R. 403, Homes for Heroes Act
25) H.R. 409, Conveying Land to the Las Vegas Motor Speedway
26) H.R. 411, Great Cats and Rare Canids Act
27) H.R. 445, Heavy Duty Hybrid Vehicle Research, Development and Demonstration Act
28) H.R. 448, Elder Abuse Victims Act
29) H.R. 466, Wounded Veteran Job Security Act
30) H.R. 469, Produced Water Utilization Act
31) H.R. 479, Wakefield Act
32) H.R. 509, Marine Turtle Conservation Reauthorization Act
33) H.R. 515, Radioactive Import Deterrence Act
34) H.R. 548, Civil War Battlefield Preservation Act
35) H.R. 549, National Bombing Prevention Act
36) H.R. 553, Reducing Over-Classification Act
37) H.R. 554, National Nanotechnology Initiative Amendments Act
38) H.R. 556, Southern Sea Otter Recovery and Research Act
39) H.R. 559, Fair, Accurate, Secure and Timely Redress Act
40) H.R. 577, Vision Care for Kids Act
41) H.R. 601, Box Elder Utah Land Conveyance Act
42) H.R. 603, Utah National Guard Readiness Act
43) H.R. 626, Federal Employees Paid Parental Leave Act
44) H.R. 628, Encouraging enhancement of expertise in patent cases among district judges
45) H.R. 631, Water Use Efficiency and Conservation Research Act
46) H.R. 632, Encouraging Silver Alert Plans
47) H.R. 637, South Orange County Recycled Water Enhancement Act
48) H.R. 685, United States Civil Rights Trail Special Resource Study Act
49) H.R. 729, Phylicia’s Law
50) H.R. 738, Death in Custody Reporting Act
51) H.R. 748, CAMPUS Safety Act
52) H.R. 749, Technical Amendment to Federal Election Campaign Act
53) H.R. 756, National Pain Care Policy Act
54) H.R. 762, Validating a final patent number
55) H.R. 780, Student Internet Safety Act
56) H.R. 842, Naming R. Jess Brown U.S. Courthouse in Jackson, Mississippi
57) H.R. 844, Marine Mammal Rescue Assistance Amendments
58) H.R. 860, Coral Reef Conservation Act Reauthorization
59) H.R. 869, Naming Scott Reed Federal Building and U.S. Courthouse in Lexington, Kentucky
60) H.R. 885, Improved Financial and Commodity Markets Oversight and Accountability Act
61) H.R. 887, Naming James A. Leach U.S. Courthouse in Davenport, Iowa
62) H.R. 905, Thunder Bay National Marine Sanctuary and Underwater Preserve Boundary Modification Act
63) H.R. 908, Missing Alzheimer’s Disease Patient Alert Program Reauthorization
64) H.R. 911, Stop Child Abuse in Residential Programs for Teens Act
65) H.R. 934, Conveying certain submerged lands to Commonwealth of Mariana Islands
66) H.R. 940, Conveyance of certain National Forest System land in Louisiana
67) H.R. 946, Plain Writing Act
68) H.R. 957, Green Energy Education Act
69) H.R. 959, Officer Daniel Faulkner Children of Fallen Heroes Scholarship Act
70) H.R. 965, Chesapeake Bay Gateways and Watertrails Network Continuing Authorization Act
71) H.R. 985, Free Flow of Information Act
72) H.R. 1002, Pisgah National Forest Boundary Adjustment Act
73) H.R. 1017, Chiropractic Care Available to All Veterans Act
74) H.R. 1018, Restore Our American Mustangs Act
75) H.R. 1029, Alien Smuggling and Terrorism Prevention Act
76) H.R. 1043, Deafy Glade Land Exchange Act
77) H.R. 1044, Port Chicago Naval Magazine
78) H.R. 1053, Chesapeake Bay Accountability and Recovery Act
79) H.R. 1061, Hoh Indian Tribe Safe Homelands Act
80) H.R. 1065, White Mountain Apache Tribe Water Rights Quantification Act
81) H.R. 1080, Illegal, Unreported, and Unregulated Fishing Enforcement Act
82) H.R. 1084, CALM Act
83) H.R. 1088, Mandatory Veteran Specialist Training Act
84) H.R. 1089, Veterans Employment Rights Realignment Act
85) H.R. 1107, Relating to certain public contracts
86) H.R. 1110, PHONE Act
87) H.R. 1120, Central Texas Water Recycling Act
88) H.R. 1129, Authorizing iron working training program for Native Americans
89) H.R. 1139, COPS Improvements Act
90) H.R. 1145, National Water Research and Development Initiative Act
91) H.R. 1147, Local Community Radio Act
92) H.R. 1168, Veterans Retraining Act
93) H.R. 1170, New Assistive Technologies for Specially Adapted Housing
94) H.R. 1171, Homeless Veterans Reintegration Program Reauthorization
95) H.R. 1172, Requiring List on VA Website of Organizations Providing Scholarships for Veterans
96) H.R. 1177, 5-Star Generals Commemorative Coin Act
97) H.R. 1178, Requiring a study on the use of Civil Air Patrol personnel and resources to support homeland security missions
98) H.R. 1216, Naming Lance Corporal Matthew P. Pathenos Post Office in Chesterfield, Missouri
99) H.R. 1217, Naming Specialist Peter J. Navarro Post Office in Ballwin, Missouri
100) H.R. 1218, Naming Lance Corporal Drew W. Weaver Post Office in Saint Charles, Missouri
Click to expand...
372 Bills That Have Been Passed by the House & Not Yet

Seems to me that the house IS trying to govern, and the Senate Democrats are refusing to do so.
 
Visbek said:
Or, get it permanently restored to talking filibusters. We can only hope.



Uh huh. Did you not notice how the filibuster has no Constitutional basis? How its use has dramatically escalated? How Senators have been directly elected for decades?

And yet again: The Constitution stipulates that the Senate is supposed to decide based on a simple majority, not a supermajority, with a handful of exceptions. This is taking a step towards the original intent of the Senate, not away from it.



We can only dream of eliminating that obsolete appendage of the colonial era.



Uh, yeah, "elected representatives passing legislature with a simple majority" is not, by definition, a "direct democracy."

The US will probably get a little more democratic in some respects. But I see little indication that we're going to have national referendums on a regular basis.
Click to expand...

the constitution simply states the senate can make its own rules, specifying a simple majority is not in it. The filibuster has been around since 1806 until the 21st of Nov this year. But speaking of doing away with the electoral college, I think it would take a constitutional amendment to do that. The electors and the procedures for the electoral college is in Article II. But you're right, it is old and states now which were once very important are nothing else than lines drawn on a map.

Perhaps it is time to just let each political party do exactly what they want to do, it is that way anyway. After all no one can fight city hall or this immensely huge bureaucracy. No one said life was fair and politics certainly isn't. Time to just fade away I suppose.
 
Mithros said:
I think it's safe to say that the current filibuster is effectively dead. But I don't think you can lay that on Reid for better or worse.

I like the filibuster, and think that minority rights are an important part of the Senate. But the filibuster has been broken.

The bottom line is that the minority party had become obstructionist just to be obstructionist. How can anyone rationally defend holding up a nominee for almost two years; especially when that nominee received 90+ confirmation votes with zero objections? Neither party is going to get a super-majority any time soon. The only way for the senate to function moving forward was for something to happen.

IMO, the senate needs to settle on a nuclear proof filibuster that is *MUCH* harder to use. Bring back the mandatory speaking part of the filibuster. If you want to stop the senate from functioning, you should have to get up and tell us why.
Click to expand...

You defend it by saying the majority got 99% of they want. What has the minority gotten? They theoretically represent 45% of the country, but because the majority represents 55%, the only things that get done is what 55% want? What about the rest of us? And that's why the minority has to use whatever leverage they have.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom