Posted on 11/20/2014 8:31:30 AM PST by C19fan
Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) wants Republicans to reverse the Democrats' filibuster reforms in the new year, arguing that doing so will make it tougher for President Barack Obama to get his nominees approved.
The new system requires just 51 votes to advance executive branch nominees and judges nominated for all courts except the Supreme Court, instead of the 60 votes that were previously required. Democrats approved the reforms after Republicans were refusing to let many of Obama's nominees go through. Half the nominees filibustered in the country's history, for example, were blocked by Republicans during the Obama administration.
(Excerpt) Read more at huffingtonpost.com ...
we called this a long time ago
McConnell and Boehner have no intention of being opposed to Oppose, except in rhetoric to mollify the “base”
South Carolina does not have recall. We did try to oust him during the primary, but fell well short of success.
I take seriously the argument that it is better to put it back at 60. Obama might nominate numerous dreadful people, and if the Democrats have 46 votes, they only need “reach across the aisle” to pick up 5 Republican squishes. Better to make it nearly impossible for Obama to appoint any more like Holder.
Who knew I would totally agree with Orin Hatch!?
“Frankly, I intend to win with our candidate for the presidency in 2016, and we will give them a taste of their own medicine,” said Hatch in a speech at the Federalist Society conference Friday.
“We should not return to the old rule,” he added. “We should teach those blunderheads that they made a big mistake. And we have the votes to stop bad judges if we want to.”
Reverse the rule. 60 for appointments. 51 for cloiture for everything else.
Cloture
That’s well and good, but why not change it to 60 votes so long as Obama is still President, then change it back to 51 if a Republican is elected in 2016? Dingy Harry set the precedent that the filibuster rules can be changed to suit the majority party, so why not?
As painful as it is to say...he may have a point.
Obviously not. The knee jerk brigade doesn’t have time for reading.
Reading the article.....Where’s the fun in that?
I don’t normally curse.
In this case, I wish FR had a forum where we could express thoughts about people like Graham using expletives openly.
The response to this thread is so bad its embarrassing. Did anyone even bother to read the article? Restoring the filibuster rule makes it HARDER for Obama to get nominations through. Not easier. In case we all didn’t notice Obama is still, unfortunately, President. He still makes the nominations.
I normally respect the collective opinion of the Free Republic, but sometimes they truly make me scratch my head.
What you’re missing here is that the majority of posters on this thread are so driven by Lindsey Graham hatred that they can’t think straight.
Believe me, I don’t like the guy. But I hate Harry Reid even more.
I’m with you. But in this instance he (Graham) happens to be right.
If you leave it the way it is...then if we get the presidency it will only take 51 votes to call for a vote for a supreme court nominee, then all we’ll need is the majority to confirm.
The repubs will have 54...HOw are the democrats going to get 60 votes to allow a vote? You would need 16 repubs to defect. With it at 51 votes...to call for a vote, you would only need 5 repubs to defect.
Leave it as it is...
I can’t believe SC keeps voting in that pansy homosexual!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.