EVERY Returning Senate Dem Has Signed On For Filibuster Reform

[babylonsister]

http://www.prospect.org/csnc/blogs/tapped_archive?month=12&year=2010&base_name=senate_dems_sign_on_for_filibu

Senate Dems Sign On For Filibuster Reform.


Every returning Democratic Senator has signed on to a letter in support of filibuster reform:

While it does not urge a specific solution, Democrats said it demonstrates increased backing in the majority for a proposal, championed by Sen. Tom Udall, D-N.M., and others, weaken the minority’s ability to tie the Senate calendar into parliamentary knots.

Among the chief revisions that Democrats say will likely be offered: Senators could not initiate a filibuster of a bill before it reaches the floor unless they first muster 40 votes for it, and they would have to remain on the floor to sustain it. That is a change from current rules, which require the majority leader to file a cloture motion to overcome an anonymous objection to a motion to proceed, and then wait 30 hours for a vote on it.

... The fact that every returning Democrat signed the letter circulated by Sens. Carl Levin, D-Mich., and Mark Warner, D-Va., urging changes underscores growing determination on the part of the Senate’s majority to raise the bars for filibusters.

I've reported on the efforts of Udall and other key reform-minded senators, including Oregon's Jeff Merkley, to convince their colleagues to join them in lowering the chamber's procedural obstacles with a majority vote on their first day back in session, likely January 5, which may even require the help of Vice President Joe Biden. With support massing, it may very be possible for the new guard to shock the Washington establishment and bring the Senate into the 21st century. Who said 2011 was going to be a boring year in Congress?

-- Tim Fernholz

[Oceansaway]

1. K&R...n/t

[Tx4obama]

2. More info and more comments on the link below

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=439x61937

[babylonsister]

3. So sorry; missed that thread. nt

[Tx4obama]

4. Nothing to be sorry about.

It's always good to have 'good' articles in more than one forum, IMO.

Merry Christmas :)

[unblock]

5. this is great, but unfortunately, 50 votes on major legislation will still be a challenge

but hopefully, this will at least clear out the backlog of federal judicial appointments and such.

[yodermon]

6. can a new session of the Senate pass bills that

have been passed by the *previous* House?

[former9thward]

8. No. Legislation dies at the end of a Congress.

No Congress can ever bind a Congress that follows it.

[sofa king]

13. Although it can be re-introduced.

I'm not sure about this, but I believe that Texas Republican Ernest Istook may have attempted to sneak a rider de-tribalizing American Indians into legislation in every one of the seven Congresses in which he served. There was a time when I looked forward to finding it within minutes of first publication, because Istook never significantly changed key phrases in his bill.

So I would search for that language every day in the Congressional Record, and at least once every two years, I'd find it, like a burning bag of poo on the doorstep.

[former9thward]

14. Since tribes are mentioned in the Constitution I wonder if

legislation like that would survive a Constitutional challenge. I don't think so.

[sofa king]

18. Yep, it sure can.

Specifically, centuries of warped and anti-Indian case law has determined that because of their mention in Article I, Section 8, clause 3, Indian tribes exist at the pleasure of Congress, and at any time they can be "regulated" straight out of existence.

This in fact happened through the "termination" phase of tribal-federal relations, in the mid-20th Century. Every time a tribe gets a little ahead, the non-Indian locals get some hyperconservative poltroon to rattle around the threat of termination in Congress. I know. I made a good living fighting that, year after year.

Originally, tribes had a sovereignty that in many ways exceeded that of the states. They negotiated with the United States by treaty, for example. But every time a tribe gets a leg up on its neighbors, those neighbors squawk to Congress and tribal rights are further reduced, from the original "totally sovereign" to "free-ish, minus 1000+ pages of rights taken away as recorded in 25 CFR and subject to constant meddling on a case-by-case basis."

[Kurovski]

7. I love this news, I heard about it on Rachel, donchaknow.

I hope Baby Jesus makes it happen, dammit.

Don't forget to holiday drink and drive, er, um...something, i dunno.

:hi: :hug:

[babylonsister]

9. LOL!

Hi, Buddy! :hug:

[lumberjack_jeff]

10. Why?

Hello??? Has someone not been keeping up with current events? Speaker Boner isn't going to send any legislation to the Senate worth passing.

[Kurovski]

11. They can do it on the 5th.

One last chance, if they take it. The Boner will be sheathed for one more day.

[krawhitham]

12. They can still pass the 500+ bills that Pelosi has already passed

if they pass them as is

[former9thward]

15. No they can't. Those all died if not passed with the

adjournment of Congress. They have to be re-introduced.

[Honeycombe8]

16. Dare I hope for this? It does seem as if the Dems have been shocked into action...

taking some initiative and standing up for something. Maybe I CAN have some hope that this will happen?

[mikekohr]

17. Here's the chart on Senate Obstructionalism

?

had it not been for the Republican douche bags in the Senate and the dipshit rules that allowed this we would have done much better in the fall election. People want action and the Senate threw a wet blanket on the most accomplished House record in 40 years.

[bemildred]

19. That should be enough. nt