Frist has necessary votes to change filibuster rules

Washington Times ^ | Monday, February 14, 2005 | By Charles Hurt and Stephen Dinan

[gitmo]

He needs to do things:

1. Restore the original meaning of filibuster. This lazy-man's filibuster is ludicrous and does nothing other than redefine the requirements of the Senate votes.

2. Prohibit filibusters altogether when it comes to the congressional mandate of 'advice and consent'.

[gitmo]

Thanks for the link, CM. Excellent write-up. I've added it to my public links.

[gitmo]

I think the Republicans should go pre-emptive and change the rules right up front. In the long run it will save a lot of grief.

Absolutely.

[gitmo]

I don't know. I like Bush's strategery of getting as much done every day as possible. Don't flatulate around with these clowns. Just move the government to the right with each passing day.

[JSteff]

"I think the Republicans should go pre-emptive and change the rules right up front. In the long run it will save a lot of grief. The Democrats will be less likely to challenge them on other issues where the Dems can't win."

Exactly. If the Republicans get the battle over with quicker it will be such a long time (to the average citizen") until the next election that the issue will be not be able to be effectively raised against them by the dems or the press.

Get it over and done with.

[DixieOklahoma]

This issue should be enough to get republicans to 60 senate seats after 2006

[steve8714]

They already did this, some years back.

[ExSoldier]

And in politics, perception is 90% of reality.

Well said and oh SO true!

[Condor51]

***STOP and think about this real hard before you jump off this cliff. etc, etc......***

With all due respect, the only flaw in your argument (IMHO) is that the Dems have already used the so-called Nuclear Option to change existing Senate rules. It was in the fairly recent past (when KKK Byrd was Leader) and without a doubt they will use it again to suit their needs when they again take the majority (which is inevitable).

In fact, their reason for using said option back then was the exact condition that exists today. The republican minority was clogging up things with a threat of filibuster. So the Dems changed the rules.

(another poster has a link to filibuster history and the dems use of the rules)

[OXENinFLA]

Was wasn't paying attention to the Senate when Byrd was the leader.

That must have been what Sessions was talking about last night on PBS.

Judging Judges

[Seadog Bytes]

RE: "...Can anyone name for me the last great Republican Senate leader, because I can't seem to recall any?"

BUMP!

[harpo11]

Don't just talk about it, Senator Frist, do it.

Don't worry about when or if the GOP would be in the minority. You are tops and it's time to act like it. We didn't work hard to put the GOP in the majority for lollygaggin' around.

Now is the time for all good GOP Senators to come to the aid of the Constitution.

[votelife]

Go here to email Frist and tell him to use the Constitutional option!
http://frist.senate.gov/