Filibluster
Reid intends to do all this during a brief window at the start of the next Congress, when, it is argued (with not a little controversy), the Senate can determine its rules of order with a bare majority, and not the two-thirds vote typically required. In contrast with the House, the Senate considers itself a “continuing body,” meaning its rules carry from one Congress to the next. Reid’s stratagem would break radically from that tradition in order to push through the filibuster changes — as many have put it, effectively “breaking the rules to make the rules.”
If the proposed changes sound minor and the means of change arcane, let us simplify things: The Democrats look back at the last four years, in which they fundamentally reshaped the financial and health-care industries — in the latter case without the support of any Republicans, most independents, and some Democrats — and think they didn’t jam enough things through.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Didn’t any of you see Lincoln?
The ends justify the means.
Skywise on December 4, 2012 at 8:39 PM
Smug Bastrids dont even attempt the appearance of fair play because their Presstitutes protect them. Absolute Power corrupts absolutely. We Americans may need find at leastthe courage of the Egyptians to end this reign of terror and corruption!
ConcealedKerry on December 4, 2012 at 9:39 PM
More emphasis that the democrats are pulling out all the stops since it is obvious that there isn’t anyone that can stop them.
The President is free to decide when the Senate is in recess despite the Senate not being so. Now, Reid is able to decide that Senate rules can be passed by a simple majority…just because he can.
Who would challenge him? Who would have the authority to actually punish Senators for breaking the rules?
No one.
The President, and Congress can make up their own rules in an effort to seize additional powers.
I hope our liberal friends take special note of these situations because precedent is being set here. These powers will be used against them when the positions are reversed.
The Democrats, including Reid, are all about “minority rights” when they are in the minority. Once they are in the majority, suddenly the 50% of the country that DIDN’T vote democrat don’t matter.
Talk about taxation without representation.
Flashwing on December 5, 2012 at 12:48 AM
1. The Dem President won.
2. The Senate has a Dem majority.
3. The House is so gerrymandered that the Dem House candidates won more total votes than the Rep House candidates.
What 50% of the country are you talking about ??
Also, National Review was for filibuster reform when the Democrats were in the minority. Now, not so much.
sanjeevn on December 5, 2012 at 1:39 AM
Yes, sanjeevn, but at some point the worm will turn and the popularity of Obama, such as it is, will collapse.
You can’t see this yet because you’re a partisan.
I’m a Movement Conservative. I hate the Bushie GOP. They’re getting what they deserve. BUT, when the GOP returns to power, and it will (you can tell this by the fact that the Democrats are so triumphalist and filled with hybris, which always goeth before the Fall…), there won’t be a Filibuster left to protect Obamacare or many Democratic “achievements”.
And by this time, the GOP will have become far more radicalized and Reaganite, and far less willing to compromise, as the Democrats became after 2004.
But you can’t see this, because Progs are living in the Now, which is their fatal mistake.
victor82 on December 5, 2012 at 7:54 AM