Posted on 11/21/2013 6:13:21 AM PST by sickoflibs
The Senate is on the verge of striking down the long-standing filibuster rules for most presidential nominations, potentially doing so on a party-line vote that would alter nearly 225 years of precedent.
Democrats, infuriated by what they see as a pattern of obstruction and delay over President Obamas nominees, expect to trigger the showdown by bringing up one of the recent judicial nominees whom Republicans blocked by a filibuster. According to senior Democratic aides, Majority Leader Harry M. Reid (D-Nev.) will set in motion a complicated parliamentary process that ends with a simple-majority vote setting a new rule that will allow for swift confirmation of executive branch nominees and most selections for the federal judiciary without having to clear a 60-vote hurdle.
(clip)
The impact of the move is more far-reaching, however. The means for executing this rules change a simple-majority vote, rather than the long-standing two-thirds majority required to change the chambers standing rules is more controversial than the actual move itself.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
Reid again.
The communists always change the rules when they are in charge. They’ll have to change them back if and when America ever has a GOP Senate and a Republican in the White House again. Communists are some sicko bass turds.
I hope they come to rue the day if they succeed, which hopefully will allow us to essentially eliminate the Democratic party (not forever, just long enough to ensure our survival as a nation for generations to come).
They threaten this all the time, its time someone took Reid out to the woodshed.
If they do this, i hope the GOP remembers this for a long time to come, nothing more than a power grab.
Bring it on, Harry...
They must be worried about their chances in 2014. They need to get their activist judges in place to make sure they can still rule if they are voted out next year.
Quit issuing idle threats Reid you wimp. Do it.
Perhaps then the Senate minority and the gelded House majority will get pissed and exercise their constitutional prerogative.
Personally, I don’t like the filibuster rule. I’d love to see them break it. Then it can be set aside all the time.
It is, in my opinion, an illegal amending of the constitution, even though folks point out that the Senate can make their own rules. (Clearly meant for the organizing of committees, schedules, etc., and not for already spelled out constitutional processes.)
What’s the advantage of getting rid of the filibuster rule? You can GET RID OF bad legislation much faster.
We can get rid of ObamaCare with winning the presidency and a simple majority vote in both houses of Congress.
We could have it repealed as early as 2016 if we get rid of the filibuster.
They wont do this because they know there is a good chance they will lose their majority in the 2014 elections.
“Theyll have to change them back if and when America ever has a GOP Senate and a Republican in the White House again”
If and when Conservative are in charge again, they need to leave those rules in place since the precedent has been set.
My feeling as well. I also do not like how the power of the Speaker and Senate Majority Leader positions have been abused either. These extra-constitutional power structures subvert the legislative process.
“They need to get their activist judges in place to make sure they can still rule if they are voted out next year.” As well as make amnesty for illegal immigrants, officially, happen, in order to make sure that U.S. conservatism is, profoundly, “set back” for many decades to come, if not for always.
2017 assuming GOP takes over the Senate, changes the rules again, and after all that wins the WH in 2016, which is a big if.
On the other hand if there was no filibuster in 2010 Obama would be rolling out single payer health care now.
This will cut both ways. After Rs take the senate, it will work against them.
IMO it’s a bluff for just this reason.
If Republicans do like Democrats would, they would immediately leave the chamber and put the nation’s business on hold until the Democrats scrapped their plan. I would urge them to do this.
When the democrats had the Presidency and the Senate was split 50-50 the democrats took all chairmenships.
Go for it, fascists. Your days as the majority are numbered.
Mene Mene Tekel Upharsin.
I agree with you.
2017...yes. You’re right. It’s the election that’s in 2016.
About “single payer”, it would be the same situation. 2 Majorities and the presidency and you could get rid of it.
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.