Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
New Mexico Senator Tom Udall is spearheading an effort to change the filibuster rules.
Filibusters no longer allowed on motion to proceed. Filibusters on simply debating a bill would no longer be allowed, instead at least two hours would be allowed on any bill that goes to the Senate floor.
Secret holds would be eliminated. Anytime a Senator puts a hold on a nomination or bill to prevent it from going forward that Senator would no longer be able to be secret about it and need to be identified.
Right to Amend. This ties in somewhat to the filibuster not being allowed on the procedure to debate. Both sides would be given the opportunity to make amendments to the bill providing the Amendment ties into the bill itself.
Talking filibuster. Doesn't change the 60 votes needed to get passed cloture and have a final vote on the bill, but forces those filibustering the bill to actually take to the floor and block it by speaking about the bill after they cote against cloture instead of simply voting against cloture
Expedite nominations, due to the fact nominations have no Amendments to them, the 30 hour post cloture vote period becomes two.
I say go for it. Remember when the dems were in the minority and regularly used the filibuster on judicial nominees? Remember the gang of 14 moderates from both parties who put a halt to the "nuclear option" the GOP was going to use?
Its a short two years until the dems likely lose the Senate. Go right ahead and change those rules, but don't cry about it when the GOP uses them against you.
I remember so many dems decrying the "nuclear option" when the GOP was thinking of deploying it....but now that they have the majority, its funny how their opinions on the matter flip flop.
You can blame it on Reid and the democrats with the use of their hard handed tactics;
What these critics routinely fail to mention (and too many reporters fail to report) is the precipitating action: the Democratic majority's repeated use of a once-rare procedural gimmick that has kept Republicans from amending bills that are brought to the floor.
My Democratic counterpart in the Senate, Harry Reid, has played quarterback, setting records for the number of times he has blocked Republicans from having any input on bills, cut off our right to debate and bypassed the committee process in order to write bills behind closed doors.
Go right ahead. The Senate can't get anything by the House, all this would effect would be the far-left radical judicial nominations....but doing so would ensure the acrimony and uber partisanship continues.
Looks OK. I think returning to a filibuster than actually requires a filibuster, is a good idea. Make them work, and openly demonstrate their process of obstruction. If is is really worth obstructing, they would do it. Now, all they have to do is vote on not discussing and voting, in other words, working.
I say go for it. Remember when the dems were in the minority and regularly used the filibuster on judicial nominees? Remember the gang of 14 moderates from both parties who put a halt to the "nuclear option" the GOP was going to use?
Its a short two years until the dems likely lose the Senate. Go right ahead and change those rules, but don't cry about it when the GOP uses them against you.
I remember so many dems decrying the "nuclear option" when the GOP was thinking of deploying it....but now that they have the majority, its funny how their opinions on the matter flip flop.
You can blame it on Reid and the democrats with the use of their hard handed tactics;
Go right ahead. The Senate can't get anything by the House, all this would effect would be the far-left radical judicial nominations....but doing so would ensure the acrimony and uber partisanship continues.
Few things, first off Bush got something like 97% of his judicial nominees past, which was a record.
Secondly, McConnell basically made up crap in the op-ed piece. On almost all legislation Amendments were allowed, in some cases the amount of Amendments were limited in part because the GOP made clear the pure intention of the Amendments were to delay and stall and nothing else.
Third, this is quite a bit different from the Nuclear Option, which would have eliminated filibusters all together. This still allows filibusters, but forces an actual filibuster fight, instead of simply voting against cloture and that being it, prevents those from putting secret holds and not revealing who is actually putting the hold on.
Secondly, McConnell basically made up crap in the op-ed piece. On almost all legislation Amendments were allowed, in some cases the amount of Amendments were limited in part because the GOP made clear the pure intention of the Amendments were to delay and stall and nothing else.
Nonsense. McConnell was dead on right about reid's tactics and this has been going on for 2 years - even worse treatment in the House.
New Mexico Senator Tom Udall is spearheading an effort to change the filibuster rules.
Filibusters no longer allowed on motion to proceed. Filibusters on simply debating a bill would no longer be allowed, instead at least two hours would be allowed on any bill that goes to the Senate floor.
Secret holds would be eliminated. Anytime a Senator puts a hold on a nomination or bill to prevent it from going forward that Senator would no longer be able to be secret about it and need to be identified.
Right to Amend. This ties in somewhat to the filibuster not being allowed on the procedure to debate. Both sides would be given the opportunity to make amendments to the bill providing the Amendment ties into the bill itself.
Talking filibuster. Doesn't change the 60 votes needed to get passed cloture and have a final vote on the bill, but forces those filibustering the bill to actually take to the floor and block it by speaking about the bill after they cote against cloture instead of simply voting against cloture
Expedite nominations, due to the fact nominations have no Amendments to them, the 30 hour post cloture vote period becomes two.
There have been attempts to change it since the last time it was changed (1973). But the minority always likes it the way it is now, until they are the majority.
Nonsense. McConnell was dead on right about reid's tactics and this has been going on for 2 years - even worse treatment in the House.
Amendments were allowed on virtually every bill, but limits were put in place so that the GOP could not completely obstruct delay and stall as much as they wanted so McConnell went nuts.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
