Here's an interesting take on the filibuster.

[Arkansas Granny]

Link to tweet

?s=20

Jon Zal
@OfficialJonZal
Get rid of the filibuster and pass everything: healthcare, childcare, family leave, minimum wage, etc. Pass it all. Make Republicans have to try to take those things away from people instead of letting Republicans stop those things from ever happening. You’ll win every time.
1:06 PM · Jan 21, 2021
103.7K
24.6K people are Tweeting about this

That might be the only way to show people how much better their lives would be if the United States had social programs like the rest of the industrialized nations.

[Pantagruel]

1. Not sure the votes are there

Sen. from right leaning states are hard sells on Gv't programs, Manchin, Sinnema and others.
Otherwise, I agree with the concept.

[Fullduplexxx]

2. If it's presented this way to them they may change their minds

[Blaukraut]

8. If Tester can be in favor of "getting shit done", so can Manchin and Synema

Tester basically advocated getting rid of the filibuster in so many words. His state isn't exactly a liberal mecca either.

[Politicub]

10. Give Manchin and Sinnema all of the pork they want for their states

Anything it takes to get legislation that will endure for decades to get passed is peanuts compared to the long-term benefits.

[OMGWTF]

17. Typically, red states are the ones who need help the most.

You know, those "taker" states that the blue states support.

[Bernardo de La Paz]

3. "Keep your gubmint hands off'n my Medicare!" . . . nt

[dchill]

12. Sounds good when cast in a different light, eh?

[BComplex]

4. THIS post is reality of boots on the ground. These are the programs Americans can't

overturn if they're ever granted. And once granted, democrats need to go on ALL the news organizations, and take out ads in all the major papers, tooting their horns that DEMOCRATS are the ones who made these programs possible.

[Bleacher Creature]

5. If I could agree with something 1000%, it would be thus tweet.

The choice is clear. If the GOP filibusters everything, we're going to lose both the House and the Senate. That's virtually guaranteed, because too many people on our side will stay home because they feel like their vote in 2020 didn't make a difference.

But if we pass things that make people's lives better, we'll at least have a fighting chance to hold Congress in 2022. We could still lose, but at least we'll have a chance. And if we pass things that help millions of Americans, and still lose, we lose knowing that we made a difference, which is the point.

[Thekaspervote]

6. +1000

[TryLogic]

21. Damn right

Republicans block almost everything, then attack Democratic congress for being do-nothing congress. Congress has, what?, 15% approval rating.

Stop fooling around. Get stuff done. Just do it.

[gab13by13]

7. Pretty sure we don't have the votes yet

[Hortensis]

9. Right, we don't. We'd lose some. But we'd win some also.

But that's always been the argument and problem: that Republicans use this anti-democracy tool to gain great ground and that we can't afford to lose the same advantage, not least when we have nominal control of the chamber, to do what we need to.

[FBaggins]

11. We don't

I doubt that it would even be particularly close

And, just like previous "nuclear" options... I suspect that we would later come to regret it.

[ancianita]

13. Not just interesting but our duty. When voters see us "deliver" by the end of 2021, we'll win 2022.

[MoonlitKnight]

14. It's well past time

Senators need to legislate. That means debate and votes. There is no accountability without recorded votes. It’s the most basic function of a legislative body. The Senate has shirked its duty for far too long.

[bucolic_frolic]

15. Torture them with a limited filibuster

3 a year for 3 days each, and

2 a year for 10 days each, and

1 absolute filibuster per Congressional term.

Their choice on each.

I'm not a big fan of silencing the minority. If we don't want tyranny, and we don't want tyranny of the minority like Moscow Mitch McConnell has practiced at times, and we want Judges debated on the merits and not by burying their nominations, then minorities must be heard. That's open government. We've lived under it. We can do better.

Plus it will be fun to see them try to invent rationales for their positions - because they have none. They've never thought about explaining anything. They just want to exercise power. Theirs.

[SunSeeker]

16. K & R & Retweeted!

[bringthePaine]

18. simple + effective + pre-emptive elegant + proper + doable...superbly wrought challenge!

[forgotmylogin]

19. I think "filibuster" wasn't designed as a procedural thing.

Originally to filibuster legislation, a person or party had to hold the floor and talk to delay the vote. The only way to end a filibuster (I believe) was to get an in-person 2/3rds vote to close debate, so that's why you hear of people reading the phonebook all night to stop legislation they believed needed to be stopped.

I say trash the shortcut "insta-filibuster" which is just a cheap way for changing the majority threshold to pass bills and keep the manual one. If they want to hold things up, they need to work for it.

[appmanga]

20. Just let it go back to speaking filibuster

That way, it still exists, but exists in the form that compels the objectors to make their case and move public opinion and not simply just gum up the works. The filibuster used to be dragged out to oppose civil rights legislation. Today, the end result is the same AND it's easier to achieve. Stop playing around and pull the sheet off of what's going on here.

[Wounded Bear]

22. Requiring super majorities to pass legislation is not democratic...

[bucolic_frolic]

23. Republicans got everything they wanted under Trump, filibuster is no use to Dems anymore

Nuke the filibuster. They will only use it against us, and not allow us to use it against them.