by Jim G.
Member since:
July 13, 2009

Change The U. S.Senate Filibuster Rule!

January 18, 2013 07:09 PM UTC
views: 0 | 9 people recommend this | comments: 27

Will Harry "Milquetoast" Reid have the gonads to change the U'S. Senate filibuster rule next week?  Or will they continue to be a legislative body with a 14% approval rating that fiddles while Rome burns? If they insist upon making fools of themselves by bringing Congress to a halt, while legislation vital to our country's survival remains unresolved, make them stand at the lecturn if front of the public and be identified for the fools that they are.

Bill Moyers, Moyers & Company
Excerpt: "Unless the Senate reforms the filibuster at the beginning of the new 113th Congress - that's as soon as next Tuesday, January 22 - the minority wrecking crew remains in charge for the next two years."
READ MORE

Comments: 27

Karl Leuba Jan 18, 2013, 7:38pm UTC
Require a recorded roll call vote on every cloture motion.
Jim G. Jan 18, 2013, 9:31pm UTC
For sure, but Harry Reid is already backing down on what the Senate should do.....
Jim G. Jan 18, 2013, 9:32pm UTC
The "Good Ol' Boy's Club." Ya gotta go along to get along.....
Ken S. Jan 18, 2013, 9:37pm UTC
The then Speaker of the House (Nancy Pelosi) said "We have to pass the bill so we can find out what's in it" as regards health care (the largest most impacting piece of legislation bill in American history).
The Vice President (Biden) said just yesterday ‘We Don’t Have Time To Prosecute Everybody Who Lies’ On Background Checks (for gun purchases under current law).
Harry Reid refuses to allow properly passed House bills to even be considered in the Senate and has not taken action to pass a budget in over three years.
The President routinely violates precedent and the rule of law in numerous actions.

When these corrupt and lawless actions take place which purposefully put agenda over oath then NO further power should be extended to such poster-children for the idea that power corrupts. Absolutely no change to the filibuster bill.
Jim G. Jan 18, 2013, 9:46pm UTC
Bullcrap. In the past 2 years the GOP has filibusted more bills than in the previous 20 years. "It’s no wonder that Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell is so opposed to reforming the filibuster. He’s addicted to it. McConnell just filibustered his own bill to raise the debt ceiling. McConnell, a stalwart Republican from Kentucky was trying to prove that Democrats don’t have the votes to weaken Congress’ authority on the debt limit, which didn’t work out in his favor as they called his bluff, and he ended up filibustering his own bill."
Jim G. Jan 19, 2013, 3:08am UTC
Spot on.
Ken S. Jan 19, 2013, 8:41am UTC
You are either deceiving others or being deceived when you contend that Reid is the slightest bit interested in protecting 'the voice and power' of the minority. This effort to change the filibuster rule has the very opposite goal.
Jim G. Jan 19, 2013, 10:06am UTC
To the contrary Ken, the filibuster rule would still be in effect. The proposed change would simply make open to the public just who & why they are holding up legislation. One might equate it to Super-Pacs who hide the identity of their donors.
Chris Morgan Jan 18, 2013, 10:02pm UTC
Moyers, as usual, makes excellent points.
Jim G. Jan 19, 2013, 3:09am UTC
Always.
Chris Morgan Jan 18, 2013, 10:02pm UTC
Ditto on your response to Ken.
Jim G. Jan 19, 2013, 3:09am UTC
:-)
Reid probably looks at it like I do, you still have the house blocking everything, what's the point?, and you may need that filibuster sooner than you think. Those districts Repubs gerrymandered will affect the senate, too, just not as fast, and for more years when it does. . .
Jim G. Jan 19, 2013, 3:15am UTC
Sure, they (Dem's) worry about the shoe being on the other foot someday Ron, but how does gerrymandering affect statewide Senate popular voting?
12:01 AM brainfart, ignore the tired guy, lol.
Jim G. Jan 20, 2013, 3:32am UTC
LOL.
I think i may be getting old sometimes, lately.
Jim G. Jan 20, 2013, 7:09pm UTC
But it beats the alternative, eh?
Ken S. Jan 19, 2013, 8:44am UTC
How's this for compromise? Repeal the 17th Amendment (the direct election of Senators - for all you Ivy League educated out there) and you can have any filibuster rule you want.
Jim G. Jan 19, 2013, 10:14am UTC
Yeah, so the GOP can gerrymand Senatorial elections like they do House elections? How about eliminating the obsolete Electoral College?
Ken S. Jan 19, 2013, 2:00pm UTC
A state is a state - no opportunity for gerrymandering there. The entire state votes for in a senatorial election.
The electoral college is not obsolete, why would you think otherwise? It's elimination would cause small states to be completely ignored and introduce even more democratic majority (ie mob rule) thinking into elections. Bad for the republic.
If Harry Reid or Pelosi want to end the Electoral College that alone is an excellent reason for maintaining it.
Bert B. Jan 19, 2013, 3:37pm UTC
Eliminating the Electoral College would actually force politicians to campaign in all states instead of just those where a slim electoral majority gives them the whole state.
It distorts the political process, giving electors in low-population states a greater weight than those in high-population states. I understand why you like that, Ken, because those low-pop states are mostly Republican.
But it defeats an important Constitutional principle: One man, one vote.
Ken S. Jan 21, 2013, 7:04pm UTC
Bert,
Without the electoral college , no presidential candidate would visit small states like Wyoming.
Where exactly is the 'one man, one vote' principle delineated in the Constitution?
Also, voter fraud would have even more of an impact without the electoral college.
Bert B. Jan 19, 2013, 3:42pm UTC
The filibuster never made any sense in the first place, but until recently neither party abused it. Now, Republicans are using it to basically stonewall anything Democrats try to do, bringing government to a standstill...and then their noise machine tries to deflect blame onto Democrats. They are very good at that but voters are starting to see through that game.
Jim G. Jan 19, 2013, 6:16pm UTC
Ken - you know damn well that the GOP is trying to gerrymand electoral college votes so they can be split in a state instead of all votes going to a party that wins the popular vote
John Castor Jan 20, 2013, 2:13pm UTC
High time to get rid of the electoral college. Ron W. deserves MUCH better representation than any Kansas cow!

Join the Conversation
Chime in! Become a Gather member to comment.
Already a member? Sign in
top
 
Gather | Friends | Groups | Share
About Gather | Engagement Marketing | Gather Points | Advertise on Gather | Gather Press | Privacy | Terms of Service | Community Guidelines
Books | Business | Celebs | Entertainment | Family | Food | Giveaways | Health | Money | Moms | News | Politics | Sports | Style | Technology | Travel | Writing
Version 18247, "Zach"; Copyright © 2013 Gather Inc. All rights reserved.