Warren: It's Democrats' duty to change the filibuster rules

[kpete]

Republicans now hold the dubious distinction of having filibustered all three women that President Obama nominated to D.C. Circuit. Now, collectively, these three women have diverse experiences in private practice, in government, and in public interest law. Between them, they have argued an amazing 45 cases before the Supreme Court, and have participated in many more. All three have the support of a majority of Senators. So why have they been filibustered?

The reason is simple. They are caught in a fight over the future of our courts—fight over whether the courts will be a neutral forum that decides every dispute fairly, or whether the courts will be stacked in favor of the wealthy and the powerful. [...] The D.C. Circuit is a particular target because that court has the power to overturn agency regulations. If a business doesn’t like it when the agencies implement the will of Congress, they try to undermine those agencies through the D.C. Circuit. [...]

We need to call out these filibusters for what they are: naked attempts to nullify the results of the last Presidential election—to force us to govern as though President Obama hadn’t won the 2012 election. [...]

If Republicans continue to filibuster these highly qualified nominees for no reason other than to nullify the President’s Constitutional authority, then senators not only have a right to change the filibuster rules—senators have a duty to change the filibuster rules.

MORE:
http://www.warren.senate.gov/files/documents/20131113%20Judicial%20Nominees%20Speech.pdf
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2013/11/14/1255663/-Warren-It-s-Democrats-duty-to-change-the-filibuster-nbsp-rules

[Laelth]

1. k&r for Elizabeth Warren. n/t

-Laelth

[panader0]

2. She keeps saying the right things........

[indepat]

4. They have a duty, a duty to preserve and protect the Constitution of the United States including

the president's prerogative to nominate candidates for high office subject to the advice and consent of the Senate and a filibuster obstructs that duty of advice and consent. eos

[Enthusiast]

41. Exactly. Well said...nt

[Cal33]

56. She keeps telling facts -- important and true facts that the average citizen should know.

[Scuba]

3. Desperately needed leadership. Thank you Elizabeth!

[Tx4obama]

6. Warren is not the only Senator that has called out the GOP regarding their obstruction/blocks.

Other Senators have been calling out the GOP regarding their BS blocks for over a year and have proposed filibuster rule changes.

It's not like she came up with the idea on her own.

[Scuba]

9. Where's Harry? Isn't he the ONE guy who can change it?

[Tx4obama]

11. Harry's latest statements...

Nov 12, ’13

Reid Remarks On Republican Filibuster Of Qualified Judicial Nominees...

Full comments are down within the article, here: http://democrats.senate.gov/2013/11/12/reid-remarks-on-republican-filibuster-of-qualified-judicial-nominees-drug-safety-legislation/

and

And another shorter comment, here: http://democrats.senate.gov/2013/11/13/reid-statement-on-republicans-rejection-of-nina-pillards-nomination-to-the-d-c-circuit-court-of-appeals/

[Scuba]

12. Blah, blah, blah.

[Tx4obama]

14. Those were only from this week. You're he one that asked where he was :)

There are articles on the net with MANY statements he has been previously..

I'm heading out to dinner now, don't have time to find the important ones right now

[Scuba]

16. Maybe he'll send the Republicans a sternly worded letter.

[libdem4life]

5. She just won't let go...amen, sister. She's our national mother figure taking the bad young'uns to

the proverbial woodshed to straighten them up. Her bully pulpit is growing larger and louder.

[AmBlue]

46. And even more amazing, she's one of the new kids on the block

in the Senate and is constantly upstaging her more senior colleagues, but they can't say a word because SHE'S LAYING DOWN THE TRUTH!! I so admire this woman.

Contrast her with a punk like Rubio who's full of crap and politically two-stepping his every move-- all about how to "position" himself in relation to 2016-- and the difference is startling. What a breath of fresh air Elizabeth Warren is.

GO EW!!!

[libdem4life]

49. Absolutely. Seems her national coverage expands almost on a daily basis. And that's due to the

presidential candidate speculation. But that's why I'm selfish, I guess, and don't want her to give up her job...more than a job, her work. A lot of people can and want to be president and it usually is a career ender, as regards where they were before.

I would imagine you could count fingers on one hand...made up of a fist...of those standing in line to be in, or qualify for her position. She will, for certain, have a special place in our history...and we've not seen the last of it.

[Cal33]

59. Elizabeth Warren is 64. By 2016 she will be 67. If she should be president for two terms, she will

be 75 -- about time for most people to retire anyway.

[libdem4life]

60. I think you missed my point, and it wasn't about her age. It was about her very specific and badly

needed skills doing what no one else has been able to do before, and that I would prefer she continue in what she is doing. She was on TV just yesterday with a blistering speech on the Senate floor lecturing about the uncomfortable subject of their corporate financial sources/donors...a First for a newbie Senator. She couldn't do that as a candidate, let alone as President.

But as to her age, she can berate and scold and prosecute the banksters and make them either pay fines or change their ways for decades to come.

Put differently, the 1% really, really really would like to see Elizabeth Warren run for President. Get her off their backs.

[AmBlue]

64. I love that she's all about her mission-- to help the middle class...

by exposing their onerous and parasitic exploitation by Wall Street. That she's also calling out our politicians for being bought and paid for by Wall Street is even better. The TRUTH is a powerful weapon and she wields it like a sword. I think she will utilize whatever office best suits her mission and if that is in the Senate, so be it. I trust her and am so gratified to see her doing what she is doing.

[libdem4life]

65. She is a keeper.

[Cal33]

58. The you-scratch-my-back-and-I'll-scratch-yours has become so overriding and so overwhelming among

politicians that the simple truth, when told, stands out as a rare thing of beauty.

And by the way, can a senate majority leader be asked to step down and be replaced
if he proves to be ineffectual in that position?

[spanone]

7. it was their duty to do it five years ago.

Last edited Thu Nov 14, 2013, 08:53 PM - Edit history (1)

needing 60 votes is bullshit. for either party.

[tblue]

53. Amen! They should each vote and accept the consequences.

The filibuster lets them pretend they are doing something noble while they are instead being two-faced cowards.

[rhett o rick]

10. That is the most lame argument ever. Dont reform the filibuster because some day you might want

to abuse it? It's being abused now. This is not what it was intended for. And if the shoe ever gets on the other foot, be damned sure that the Republicans would waste no time "fixing" the filibuster.

[Spirochete]

13. If they ever are

Reid will just genuflect and get out of their way anyhow. They should make Warren majority leader, and put Reid on the committee to develop safer Legos, or something.

[Tx4obama]

15. Good lord. Warren has been in the Senate only 10 months - Majority Leader LOLOLOL!

[MannyGoldstein]

18. I know, is that nuts?

Why would she give up the Presidency to be Senate Majority Leader?

[dionysus]

21. .

[Tx4obama]

23. Warren is not going to run. Not enough on her resume`

Warren has no foreign policy experience and she is currently NOT loading up her resume` for a run in 2016.


Compare Warren's committees to those of Obama when he was in the U.S. Senate...

Senator Warren's committees: Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs, Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions, Special Committee on Aging
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elizabeth_warren#Committee_assignments

Senator Obama's committees
Obama held assignments on the Senate Committees for Foreign Relations, Environment and Public Works and Veterans' Affairs through December 2006.[89] In January 2007, he left the Environment and Public Works committee and took additional assignments with Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions and Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs. He also became Chairman of the Senate's subcommittee on European Affairs. As a member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Obama made official trips to Eastern Europe, the Middle East, Central Asia and Africa. He met with Mahmoud Abbas before Abbas became President of the Palestinian National Authority, and gave a speech at the University of Nairobi in which he condemned corruption within the Kenyan government.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Obama#Committees

And don't forget that Obama was Illinois State Senator for eight years: January 8, 1997 – November 4, 2004

Warren has been elected 'once' and has served in elected office for only ten months.

No way she will run - and she has even said she is not running.

[MannyGoldstein]

35. That's disappointing.

Oh well.

[dionysus]

22. silly. each congress can implement its own rules. if we took it away, rethugs can just

put it back in if they gain power.

[BlueCaliDem]

24. Exactly! IF (and that's a big IF) Republicans gain control of the Senate and retains

control of the House, guess what their very first vote will be? That's right. Doing away with the filibuster. They can dish it out, but they refuse to take it and they're going to make sure they never have to.

[dionysus]

26. i swear half the people here don't realize that a bill has to get approved by both houses

and signed by the president before it comes law.

[BlueCaliDem]

30. What?

We don't need the House to vote on or the president to sign a change in the filibuster rule. That's purely a Senate thing.

[dionysus]

31. i know, i was making an analogy that a lot of people here don't understand rules and processes.

it fell flat, apparently

[BlueCaliDem]

33. For a moment, I thought you accidentally posted in a wrong thread.

But you have to admit, your analogy was pretty . . . vague.

[dionysus]

34. yes, yes it was.

[MannyGoldstein]

36. Nice recovery!

Smooth!

[BlueCaliDem]

28. BULL. The filibuster rule is a Senate rule and can be done away with or maintained

when a new Senate convenes - or just blown up with the Constitutional Option at any time by the majority.

Do you actually believe the Republicans, should they EVER gain control of the Senate and the WH, would allow the filibuster rule to stand for Democrats to pay them back for their 100% abuse of the filibuster rule these past four years?

You can bet the farm that their first order of business in a Republican controlled Senate would be to kill and bury the filibuster rule posthaste so that nothing can stop them from packing the courts with Alitos and Scalias in favor of replacing this democracy with a pro-corporate, pro-wealthy captains of industry fascist government.

Republicans can dish it, but they can't take it. And these past four years have proven that, leaving us with no doubt what their first order of business would be.

Democrats have been weak and lazy. They've been enablers of Republican obstructionism (because they secretly agree with them), otherwise they would've done away with the filibuster years ago and allowed President Obama to have the people of his choosing in his cabinet and on the courts (the excuse they used for Duhbya Bush when the Democrats made a peep). AFter all, he did win re-election over Mittney with over 5 million more votes, didn't he?

[NightWatcher]

17. but but but Harry had a "gentlemen's agreement" and a handshake with Yurtle the Turtle

[bullwinkle428]

19. Oh, HELL to the yes!!! K&R.

[dionysus]

20. and she would be correct, as she usually is.

[DeSwiss]

25. WANTED: Someone with guts to run a democratically-operated republic nation.

- Must possess and have knowledge in the use of these:

[center]
(Male or female versions accepted)[/center]

K&R

[KG]

66. ben-wahs?

[DeSwiss]

73. Every bit of experience.....

...can be made of use somehow.

[WowSeriously]

27. It won't happen until the Republicans kill it.

And the Republicans won't need to do it. You may recall that during the entire Shrub administration the Whorepratist Media parroted the Republican tribal chant of "up or down vote".

Once President Obama took over the new Whorpratist meme became "you need 60 votes".

The only thing that changed was the "R" to a "D", and maybe a little pigmentation change as well.

[Laelth]

42. Sad, but quite true. n/t

-Laelth

[Dopers_Greed]

29. Bad idea right now

When the repugs take the Senate next year, and the presidency in 2016, we'll be sorry we changed the rules.

[BlueCaliDem]

32. ...

Just because you wish it - no matter how hard - doesn't mean it's going to happen. At this point, even Republicans are admitting that they won't be able to take the Senate in 2014 OR the WH in 2016.

[bobclark86]

55. Couple of points (as devil's advocate):

1) 14 Republicans are up, compared to 22 Democrats. Most of the races are in the Deep South and the Midwest and Rockies (places pissed off over gun control). We have more to lose.

2) Only twice in more than 100 years has a president won more than one race and then had his party retain the post the next go: Roosevelt/Truman and Reagan/Bush.

3) 2014 is a midterm. As a rule, only people who are pissed off vote in midterms in mass numbers. Happy people and "meh" people don't bother, usually.

The point is this: Don't get cocky unless you want to feel like George Bush circa Election Day +1 2006.

[Dawgs]

43. You need to try harder if you're trying to pretend you're a Democrat. n/t

[kpete]

44. you are SO funny

my friend
LOL
and
Peace,
kp

[Wilms]

37. ^

[blkmusclmachine]

38. Makes for some fine Kabuki Theatre

[merrily]

48. Good point. But, if she gets it done....

[longship]

39. She's going to be a great US Senator! nt

[UCmeNdc]

40. Warren nails it correctly again!

[winter is coming]

45. Preach it! n/t

[merrily]

47. This may be what I have been waiting for.

Few things are more sacred to Senators and more detrimental to the 99%.

I said I was going to wait and see before I made up my mind about Warren, one way or the other.


I think I just fell in love.

[grahamhgreen]

50. And has been since Obama day 1

[yurbud]

51. it's sad that she even has to say what has been obvious for years. corporate dems

Agree with GOP, but are hiding behind the skirts of the rights filibusters so they don't have to admit it.

[tblue]

52. Please make her Majority Leader TODAY!

Everytime I see Harry Reid, I wonder, 'How can this be?????'

[merrily]

61. Democratic Senators keep electing him leader, both

minority leader and majority leader.

That's how this can be.

His job is to cover their behinds, even if he has to take the heat. Obviously, he performs that job to the
satisfaction of his caucus. As a result, though, he does take the heat.

When Reid knows he has the votes to pass something, I think he does, though it's hard to know for sure. And when he doesn't have the votes, he lets everyone think he's a clod, but he never betrays any of the members of his caucus. That's his job.

[ffr]

54. I love her!

She doesn't spend one second on the news distractions. She's focused on what it'll take to move forward. Neutralize the Rethug stranglehold on American's political progress so The People's Congress can get something done!!!

F U, Mitch McConnell!

[dreamnightwind]

62. Maybe it should be required to demonstrate obstruction

before eliminating the filibuster. In this case, and for the past 5 years, it has been nothing but obstruction, so the rule should indeed be changed. When there's a new Congress, maybe the rule should reset each time, I dunno.

If it was written to reasonable criteria, I'm pretty sure Dems would never obstruct enough for a future Republican Senate majority (it will happen sooner or later) to invoke it, Dems rarely filibuster, plus as it is now, if Republicans get the Senate, they can change the rule on the slightest provocation, no generally agreed-on standard of obstruction would have to be met.

Obama isn't going to be president forever, and you never know who will have a majority in the Senate either. A push for a permanent change, nearly 5 years into his presidency, with a tight Senate election (I guess about a third of the seats turn over?) next year is a little scary to me. Thus the musings on an obstruction trigger.

[jsr]

63. Recommend

[KG]

67. whaaa? then they'd have to actually govern instead of having a justification

for their political cowardice.

[aquart]

68. Don't end filibusters.

Insist a catheter must be inserted to prove sincerity.

[silvershadow]

69. What a breath of fresh air she is. nt

[Romulox]

70. She'll have to convince Harry Reid. He vehemently opposes this. nt

[4dsc]

71. We won't hear this from Hillary

that's for sure.

[spanone]

72. the absolute MOMENT the republicans have that opportunity.....watch out.

[The Wizard]

74. The Senate is a non functioning

obsolete governing body and should be abolished by Constitutional Amendment. That whole side of the Capitol Building would be of better use as a homeless shelter for veterans.

[davidpdx]

75. She's absolutely right

The problem is they won't do it.

[defacto7]

76. Absolutely.

Do it now. The sooner the better.