Why Harry should pass a limited filibuster rule?

[kentuck]

Because one Party has decided to break the rules.

We live in a democracy. When the people vote for one Party to be the majority and to hold the White House until the next election, there are certain rules we expect both Parties to abide by.

One of those is that the President gets to nominate judicial appointments per the Constitution.

It just so happens that the GOP has staked claim to the Washington DC Court of Appeals and refuse to let the President nominate anyone to fill the three vacancies on the Court. Why is that?

Is it because the Court of Appeals in DC would be the Court to rule on "political" decisions if one Party or the other were so politically inclined. The GOP is acting in an irresponsible and unconstitutional manner and that is why Harry Reid should act on fixing the filibuster rule.

Ideally, he and the Democrats should agree to a limited filibuster, excluding judicial appointments only. Also, it should sunset at the end of every Congress. The new Congress can renew the rule if they so desire, under the condition that both Parties agree it is not a permanent rule?

But, this type of gridlock is unacceptable to our form of government and the people must act. If the GOP wins the next election, and take over the Senate, then they would also have the prerogative to pass a new rule on the filibuster because the old rule by Reid and the Democrats will have sunsetted.

[Warpy]

1. What they need to do is amend it

In case of war or regional disaster defined as affecting 2 states or more, the filibuster will be suspended. In case of 20 bills plus appointees being filibustered, the filibuster will be suspended.

The Republicans will shriek in agony, but that's really the best way to do it. The filibuster is a good tool when it's not being abused the way Republicans are abusing it.

[kentuck]

2. I think Democrats should set an example.

And only make it for judicial appointments at this time, because it is necessary that the President fill the vacancies on the Courts. And only until a new Senate comes in.

If the Democrats hold the Senate, then they could take it even further if the Republicans continued to filibuster everything.

But whatever rule is passed, it is only valid until a new Congress is sworn in.

If Democrats began to filibuster every Republican piece of legislation and even judicial appointees, then the Republicans would have every right to invoke the same rule.

[Gothmog]

3. Harry Reid needs 51 votes and Levin and others are balking

This is not solely Harry Reid's decision. Reid needs 51 votes and there are a couple of Senators who are not supporting this plan http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/reid-readies-nuclear-option

I have not yet seen a firm vote count on this, but rumor has it that Sens. Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.), Max Baucus (D-Mont.), Carl Levin (D-Mich.), Chris Coons (D-Del.), and Claire McCaskill (D-Mo.) are not yet on board, with Levin, who is retiring next year, maintaining his role as the fiercest opponent of the change....

Update: It looks like Delaware’s Chris Coons is no longer among the skeptics: “It’s time to changes the rules for nominees.”

Levin is not going to budge but with Coons, Reid may have 51 votes. Unlike Boehner, Reid is not going to go forward with this effort if he does not have the votes. It would be better if Reid can get Manchin and McCaskill on board. This is all assuming that there are no other Democratic holdouts.

[sakabatou]

4. Possibly make them make an actual filibuster ie. they have to talk, etc

[Laelth]

5. It should be eliminated altogether.

The Senate (by its very nature) has been a thorn in the side of progress in this nation for as long as we have had our current government (since 1787). Weakening the capacity for small-population states to obstruct progress in the Senate will be a major benefit to us all.

-Laelth

[99Forever]

6. Harry won't do shit.

We've seen this Kabuki Theater act too many times to count. Harry the Jellyfish surrenders every time. I can only think of one person in Washington DC who capitulates more than he does.