Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 11-29-2016, 11:37 AM
 
Location: Central Ohio
10,834 posts, read 14,940,293 times
Reputation: 16587

Advertisements

What they need to do is drop the requirement for 60 votes opting for the simpler majority vote. With 51 votes you get what you want.

Give me one good reason republicans shouldn't go nuclear. The nuclear or constitutional option is a parliamentary procedure that allows the U.S. Senate to override a rule or precedent by a simple majority of 51 votes, instead of by a supermajority of 60 votes.

This way the republicans can simply ignore democrats telling them to go chop wood or whatever else they want to do.

Oh, I got this idea from Vice Presidential contender Tim Kaine who, on October 28, 2016, sternly warned republicans that democrats would use the nuclear option... and tough garbage if they didn't like it!

Kaine: Dems will use 'nuclear option' if GOP blocks court nominee
BY JORDAIN CARNEY - 10/28/16 05:14 PM EDT

Quote:
"If these guys think guys think they are going to stonewall the filling of that vacancy, or other vacancies, then a Democratic Senate majority will say we're not going to let you thwart the law," he told The Huffington Post.
Why should any republican allow democrats to stonewall?

Of course, this was when Kaine thought they had a 99% lock on the election.

So my question is what would be wrong if Trump and his republicans followed the exact same path?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 11-29-2016, 11:50 AM
 
Location: Chicago, IL
9,701 posts, read 5,115,103 times
Reputation: 4270
I'm fully on board with them using the nuclear option. I don't want to give Republicans any outs for their vision of America. Get rid of everything that gets in the way of their cut & spend philosophy, anti-labor, pro-1% philosophy. I want these next few years to be the great Republican experiment.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-29-2016, 11:53 AM
 
Location: OH->FL->NJ
17,005 posts, read 12,597,924 times
Reputation: 8925
Remember. be careful what you wish for. You just might get it.
And get it again from a Democrat in some future year.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-29-2016, 12:08 PM
 
45,582 posts, read 27,203,264 times
Reputation: 23898
Nuclear option was brought forth by Harry Reid in 2013.

It applies to everything except the Supreme Court.

Tables have turned here...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-29-2016, 12:16 PM
 
20,462 posts, read 12,387,859 times
Reputation: 10259
well, I have mixed feelings about this. George Washington once said the House makes the tea and the Senate cools it.

I believe that an efficient government is a dictatorial government. The Senate's slower approach that requires consensus prevents the passage of bad law, even when it also prevents the passage of some good law.

This past president is a good case study. Mr. Obama would have taken the country even further to the left had the senate just been another branch like the House. Instead, the inefficiency of the Senate cooled things. I don't want to lose that.

However, there are some things that the democrats did where they bi-passed the cloture rule. In those things, righting the ship is the most important thing. There is no reason to hold to 60 votes where the dems didn't.

Obama care's replacement should not require 60 votes, has the dems bi-passed it. on Judges, the dems bi-passed it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-29-2016, 12:20 PM
 
Location: Long Island
57,315 posts, read 26,228,587 times
Reputation: 15648
Quote:
Originally Posted by DRob4JC View Post
Nuclear option was brought forth by Harry Reid in 2013.

It applies to everything except the Supreme Court.

Tables have turned here...
That is not true at all, it only applied to federal judicial and cabinet appointments (not the supreme Court) that were being held up by the GOP.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-29-2016, 12:30 PM
 
Location: Long Island
57,315 posts, read 26,228,587 times
Reputation: 15648
Already discussing the nuclear option is an overreach, there may be a good reason down the road but it needs to be a very good reason.


Quote:
Mr. McConnell is what is known on Capitol Hill as an institutionalist, a strong believer in the traditions and practices of the Senate. He was very critical of the decision by Senator Harry Reid of Nevada, the Democratic leader, who is retiring this year, to rally his party into limiting filibusters against nominees in response to Republican delaying tactics.
Mr. McConnell has said repeatedly that it is crucial to American democracy to respect the special rights of the minority party in the Senate, and that it would be a mistake to limit the filibuster, since the decision could backfire if his party fell out of power.
I don’t think we should act as if we’re going to be in the majority forever,” he said
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/12/us...se-senate.html
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-29-2016, 12:33 PM
 
41,813 posts, read 51,068,169 times
Reputation: 17865
Quote:
Originally Posted by ottomobeale View Post
Remember. be careful what you wish for. You just might get it.
And get it again from a Democrat in some future year.
Democrats have already pulled the trigger on this for executive and court appointments(excluding SCOTUS).


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zMeXlfptHxQ
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-29-2016, 12:35 PM
 
79,907 posts, read 44,222,338 times
Reputation: 17209
The 60 vote requirement should have been dropped long ago. This isn't a (R) or (D) thing. I said the same thing when the (D)'s used and said then that they would regret it.

One should be able to still exercise a proper filibuster though.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-29-2016, 12:35 PM
 
41,813 posts, read 51,068,169 times
Reputation: 17865
Quote:
Originally Posted by Goodnight View Post
Already discussing the nuclear option is an overreach, there may be a good reason down the road but it needs to be a very good reason.
AFAIK the rule change exists until the ruling party decides to change it back. The Republicans only need simple majority for any appointment excluding SCOTUS. These are the rules as set in motion by Democrats.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 08:23 AM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top