Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

The Super Committee Precedent: Why End The Filibuster Just For Deficit Reduction?

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 Donate to DU
 
Donnachaidh Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-12-11 11:23 AM
Original message
The Super Committee Precedent: Why End The Filibuster Just For Deficit Reduction?
http://www.ourfuture.org/blog-entry/2011083212/super-committee-precedent-why-end-filibuster-just-deficit-reduction

A precedent was set in the debt limit deal. If there is a crisis that so imminently threatens America's foundation that the well-being of our children and grandchildren is at risk, then we must suspend the effective supermajority requirement for passing legislation in the Senate to ensure we can take action.

That is what the so-called Super Committee does.

If it can secure a simple majority within the committee by Nov. 23 for $1.5 trillion in additional deficit reduction, then both houses of Congress must vote on by Dec. 23, under simple majority rules. No amendments. No filibusters.

Well alrighty then.

More at the link --
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
alc Donating Member (649 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-12-11 01:06 PM
Response to Original message
1. not the first time
The Constitution gives the house and senate pretty much unlimited ability to set their own rules. They've fast-tracked legislation before to get things done fast and also changed rules to get things done without forcing members to vote (e.g. to avoid having to be on record).

In this case, the senate voted to amend the rules for this bill - which is completely constitutional but it has no bearing on any other legislation. The main goal here was to get it over with before campaign season starts. If they hadn't fast-tracked it, you can be sure the amendments and filibuster threats and reconciliation of different senate/house versions would have gone on a long time. If they left the trigger date this year, there's no way they could have made it. If they removed the trigger date, the republicans would have tried to take it all the way to the election and the democrats would not accept that. A later trigger date but still far before general election would have gone into republican primaries and things would likely get even more political. So the only way to pass something and raise the debt ceiling was to agree to the fast-track this year.

There weren't enough senators to filibuster the deb ceiling bill so it passed. In a sense that was the place to filibuster the super committee recommendation bill and any rule change can be filibustered (the majority can't pass one bill fast tracking another bill to avoid a filibuster on the second bill).

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 Tue May 07th 2024, 02:50 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » General Discussion 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