Unsane
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Feb-15-09 11:15 PM
Original message |
Should Senate Dems consider abolishing the filibuster (nuclear option)? |
|
The filibuster is a PROCEDURAL rule; not a Constitutional one. No where in the U.S. Constitution does it mandate a supermajority in the Senate in order to pass legislation.
That being said. These are trying times. We need an assertive, productive Congress.
Without the filibuster, Dems would only ever need 50 votes. Biden would serve as 51. Up to 8 democrats could defect on any vote and we could STILL pass legislation.
Things that could be accomplished without a filibuster:
Bank reform
Universal healthcare
Housing reform
Education reform
Environmental reform
Social Security reform
Progressive federal judges
Employee Free Choice Act (EFCA)
Making Election Day a natl holiday
Corporate reform
Giving DC voting power in Congress
|
TTUBatfan2008
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Feb-15-09 11:19 PM
Response to Original message |
1. No, I think it's an important part of our democratic republic... |
|
Edited on Sun Feb-15-09 11:19 PM by TTUBatfan2008
The right to voice dissent is important.
|
Hawkeye-X
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Feb-15-09 11:21 PM
Response to Reply #1 |
3. Uh-huh, and how did that accomplish 8 years? |
|
The time is now for nuclear option, and it can be revoked as soon as the national emergency is over.
Hawkeye-X
|
rpannier
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Feb-16-09 12:03 AM
Response to Reply #3 |
13. Then that's what they'll say when they get back in power |
|
We're suspending it until such a time as...
|
BlooInBloo
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Feb-15-09 11:20 PM
Response to Original message |
2. I'm still not appreciating the problem. Obama got pretty much EXACTLY what he asked for. |
elocs
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Feb-15-09 11:23 PM
Response to Original message |
4. Think: The Law of Unintended Consequences. |
|
It's unlikely that the Dems will hold power forever.
|
blue_onyx
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Feb-15-09 11:25 PM
Response to Original message |
5. No...keep the filibuster |
|
The Dems won't always be in power. We may need the filibuster someday.
|
CLANG
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Feb-15-09 11:48 PM
Response to Reply #5 |
12. It seems we don't use it anyway |
kwenu
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Feb-15-09 11:28 PM
Response to Original message |
6. It's a procedural rule that promotes fairness and debate so lets keep it. The pendulum swings. |
|
Let's not get stupid just because the pendulum is in our corner.
|
Xipe Totec
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Feb-15-09 11:31 PM
Response to Original message |
7. No. This goes in the shoot yourself in the foot category. n/t |
RollWithIt
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Feb-15-09 11:31 PM
Response to Original message |
8. Absolutely not, should never even be brought up publicly.. |
|
Shame on the Republicans for ever bring that option up in the first place.
|
camera obscura
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Feb-15-09 11:32 PM
Response to Original message |
9. What do you suggest we do when the Republicans are back in power? |
|
Because whether it's 2010 or 2016 or 2024, it's happening some day.
|
Occam Bandage
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Feb-15-09 11:40 PM
Response to Original message |
10. No. I'd rather not give the Republicans the key to unlimited power once we lose an election. nt |
w4rma
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Feb-15-09 11:43 PM
Response to Original message |
11. Don't abolish it. Keep it. Just change it back to the verision that was in place 30 years ago. nt |
DU
AdBot (1000+ posts) |
Fri Apr 26th 2024, 11:01 PM
Response to Original message |