Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Senate Democrats do not have the votes to lower the 60-vote threshold to cut off filibusters.

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » General Discussion: Presidency Donate to DU
 
babylonsister Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-28-10 07:49 AM
Original message
Senate Democrats do not have the votes to lower the 60-vote threshold to cut off filibusters.

Filibuster reform is short of needed votes
By Alexander Bolton - 07/28/10 06:00 AM ET


Senate Democrats do not have the votes to lower the 60-vote threshold to cut off filibusters.

The lack of support among a handful of Senate Democratic incumbents is a major blow to the effort to change the upper chamber’s rules.

Democratic leaders in both the House and Senate are pushing for filibuster reform at the start of the new Congress next year.

Five Senate Democrats have said they will not support a lowering of the 60-vote bar necessary to pass legislation.

Another four lawmakers say they are wary about such a change and would be hesitant to support it.


A 10th Democrat, Sen. Carl Levin (D-Mich.), said he would support changing the rule on filibusters of motions to begin debate on legislation, but not necessarily the 60-vote threshold needed to bring up a final vote on bills.

Other senators who are not co-sponsors of filibuster reform did not return phone calls seeking comment.

Many Senate Democrats elected in 2006 and 2008 favor changes to longstanding chamber rules, as do liberal activists who have grown increasingly frustrated over their party’s failure to pass legislation despite controlling 59 seats.

Reid told more than 2,000 liberal activists at a political conference held over the weekend in Las Vegas that he would work to change the filibuster rule.

more...

http://thehill.com/homenews/senate/111293-filibuster-reform-is-short-of-needed-votes
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
a kennedy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-28-10 07:55 AM
Response to Original message
1. D*mn
:mad: :grr:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DCBob Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-28-10 07:58 AM
Response to Original message
2. I suspected this was going to happen..
this is no slam dunk as many DUers have been claiming.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
prolesunited Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-28-10 08:00 AM
Response to Original message
3. Why change the rules before November?
If the GOP gains a narrow majority -- which seems like it will happen with the complicity of people here -- that filibuster might be the only things that saves us from the GOP going totally off the rails.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
catgirl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-28-10 08:13 AM
Response to Reply #3
6. Because we'll still have the majority in the Senate

and as it stands, they're stalling or ruining any progress.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bornskeptic Donating Member (951 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-28-10 08:28 AM
Response to Reply #3
7. There's no possibility of changing the rules this year.
That would require 67 votes. The discussion involves the possibility of changing the rules at the beginning of the next Congress, in January, when only a majority would be required.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
T Wolf Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-28-10 08:08 AM
Response to Original message
4. Hell - the Dems do not have the votes (or the will) necessary to do anything except what the GOP
will allow them to do.

Extend and expand the wars - check.

Bail out the banksters and Wall Street - check.

Pass bogus "reform" on various issues - check.

Ignore the crimes of the previous administration - check.

Great job. Now take the rest of the summer off.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Dawgs Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-28-10 08:11 AM
Response to Original message
5. Filibuster doesn't exist anyway.
Democrats are pussies!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
earthside Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-28-10 08:36 AM
Response to Original message
8. It's Simple ...
Democratic Senate incumbents who do not support filibuster reform should be replaced by Repuglicans.

Really, we might as well have Repuglicans in those positions since the 60-vote filibuster means that they get want they want any how (or can stop anything they don't want). At least with the spineless Democrats replaced by nutty Repuglicans we would have 'truth in labeling'.

How any Democratic Senators can be against 'majority rule' and instead favor a 'tyranny of the minority' is kind of mind blowing.

I'm for democracy and majority rule even if the Repuglicans win back the Senate in the distant future -- that is the consequences of freedom and democracy; we shouldn't become so risk averse (like the present Congress) that we give-up the principles upon which this Republic was founded.

The current filibuster 'tradition' is a perversion of the Senate deliberative process ... it was never meant to stop cold votes on legislation, appointments, etc.

If a reduced Democratic Senate majority in January 2011 cannot change the rules to get rid of the anti-democratic filibuster, well, really, what is the point?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bitwit1234 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-28-10 08:58 AM
Response to Original message
9. BUT even so..don't you think some republicans
so hyped up by the media that they are going to win win win in November would not want the filibuster. If the Democrats were in the minority then they could start the log jam like they are doing. If only gets a few to switch.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NorthCarolina Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-28-10 09:23 AM
Response to Original message
10. That may be a god send considering that they wanted to push that through before
the Debt Commission recommendations are released in December. Social Security may be saved due to a lack of capitulation on filibuster reform.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TheKentuckian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-28-10 11:37 AM
Response to Reply #10
11. Except it is an up or down vote already hashed out.
Even sixty is a near lock how many pukes do you think will pass on a chance to stab the New Deal in the heart?

They overplayed the silly Party of No hand once when about seven Republican co-sponsers bailed reflexively because Obama came out for the binding legislation but it is folly to expect them to fall off again.

This won't require many Democrats to pass but we will be held responsible since Obama created the commission. It's win/win for them and the culmination (or close enough to their end game) of decades off effort and they won't get blamed for it at all.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
killbotfactory Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-28-10 12:03 PM
Response to Original message
12. Obama's fault, I assume...
If only he would do... well, I dunno, but I'm sure he could do something! One more item to add to my list of outrages and betrayals.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu May 02nd 2024, 11:25 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » General Discussion: Presidency Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC