Partisan Fever in Senate Likely to Rise.
President Obama will get a short-term lift for his nominees, judicial and otherwise, but over the immediate horizon, the strong-arm move by Senate Democrats on Thursday to limit filibusters could usher in an era of rank partisan warfare beyond even what Americans have seen in the past five years.
Ultimately, a small group of centrists Republicans and Democrats could find the muscle to hold the Senate at bay until bipartisan solutions can be found. But for the foreseeable future, Republicans, wounded and eager to show they have not been stripped of all power, are far more likely to unify against the Democrats who humiliated them in such dramatic fashion.
This is the most important and most dangerous restructuring of Senate rules since Thomas Jefferson wrote them at the beginning of our country, declared Senator Lamar Alexander, Republican of Tennessee. Its another raw exercise of political power to permit the majority to do whatever it wants whenever it wants to do it. . .
But the fever is hardly gone. The rule change lowered to a simple 51-vote majority the threshold to clear procedural hurdles on the way to the confirmation of judges and executive nominees. But it did nothing to streamline the gantlet that presidential nominees run. Republicans may not be able to muster the votes to block Democrats on procedure, but they can force every nomination into days of debate between every procedural vote in the Senate book of which there will be many.
And legislation, at least for now, is still very much subject to the filibuster.
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/11/22/us/politics/a-move-years-in-the-making-with-lasting-ramifications.html?hp
Expect amplified b.s.
frazzled
(18,402 posts)So I hardly see what more damage could be done in that respect. I think rather that this article is a bit of amplified b.s.
To quote Alexander saying it's the most dangerous restructuring of rules since Thomas Jefferson is preposterous. I believe the Senate administered its role of advise and consent quite well since 1975, when the last radical restructuring (and downsizing) of the filibuster took place. That is, at least, until the first black president was elected. Then it got ugly.
This hardly seems nuclear to me at all. And it's not just about nominees. The main point, and the thing that finally drove Democrats over the edge, was the use of this filibuster to bring all the OTHER business of the Senate to a slow crawl. It takes days and days each time they play this game with a presidential nominee--time that the Senate cannot act on other business.
This was a brave thing to do, and it will improve the operation of the Senate.
blkmusclmachine
(16,149 posts)elleng
(130,861 posts)CLEARLY, or we'll be stuck with their jack-ass behavior continually.