Who wants to bet that the filibuster's not reformed *again* in 2015?

[MannyGoldstein]

LOL!

Oh wait... that's not funny. Just tragic.

@#$%.

[LiberalLoner]

1. +1

[Zorra]

2. It very well could be eliminated if republicans take control of the Senate in 2014.

That may even be part of the Third Way's plan for a New Corporate America.

[PoliticAverse]

3. If the people that apparently think it should take 60 votes to pass a bill in the Senate

are still in charge it won't be.

[DonCoquixote]

4. cue the people that say "harry reid is not that bad"

3...2...1

If the folks at McDonalds did their job as badly as reid did his, you would order a Big Mac and instead get a $100 dollar gift certificate to Burger King.

[MannyGoldstein]

5. Well, he *has* been a good defender of Social Security.

Unlike Obama and Pelosi.

[DonCoquixote]

6. if he allows the GOP to run rampant

he will not be a defender of anything, as he is in charge of the very front where the battle is.

[MannyGoldstein]

7. Can't argue with you.

'cause you're right.

[DonCoquixote]

10. I would love to be wrong

but, to borrow a line from the Godfather, haryy is NOT a "wartime consilgere." There may have been a time when the Senate was the more calm genteell bunch, but the GOp Senate showed today, and many other time before, they need a thug like the House does. We need someone that will cap knees and hit below the belt!

[joshcryer]

9. erm, he INTRODUCED the virtual filibuster

he just couldn't predict it would be abused so much

[kentuck]

8. Naw.. If it was gonna happen, it would already have been done...

They don't want to not have that safeguard if these crazy folks take over the Senate.

[joshcryer]

11. Agreed, but it could be reversed if we lost the Senate.

It could be reversed any time there is a new Senate seated. You only need 51 votes to change the rules. If we had less than 51 Democrats in the Senate our problems would be far worse than crazies taking over the Senate.

[Zorra]

13. We should have beat them to it. Now we're screwn, because they're going to do it

if they ever re-take the Senate.

[joshcryer]

12. It was reformed to an extent this past year, but the 60 vote rule remains.

I understand why Reid wants the 60 vote rule but if he really wants it then he should make the filibuster real again, otherwise 51 majority is the only logical course of action.

The biggest change though was that a filibuster (virtual or otherwise) can be stopped if 8 people in the minority wish it so. Also, the majority leader can stop a filibuster unilaterally if it is for considering a bill (ie, all bills, introduced for consideration, must be considered, and no one can stop their consideration if the majority leader deems it).