Posted on 02/11/2010 3:34:36 PM PST by ding_dong_daddy_from_dumas
"I love Tom Harkin. I'm totally familiar with his idea," Reid said during a news conference on the Capitol on Thursday. "It takes 67 votes, and that, kind of, answers the question."
(Excerpt) Read more at thehill.com ...
I don't expect the dims to respect the rules of English any more than any other rules when it suits them.
I think that regardless of the temptation, clearer heads in the dem senate (there are some) realize that changing the fillibuster rules is a bad idea because there is no guarantee that they are going to hang on to their majority after November.
If they change the rules now, you can damnwellbetcha that the Republicans will use the new rules to hammer them with just as soon as they are back in power.
The Harkin rules change would have required 67 votes for passage. While Harry Reid may be an idiot he knew he didn’t have the votes. Harkin’s just an idiot.
Article 1, section 5: “Each House may determine the Rules of its Proceedings, punish its Members for disorderly Behavior, and, with the Concurrence of two-thirds, expel a Member.” Does the 2/3s condition apply to the whole sentence, or only to expelling s member?
A communist idiot!
Historically, it has been understood that the 2/3 vote only applied to expulsion. I think that's the best reading of the sentence; otherwise, it would have said, "Each House may, with the Concurrence of two-thirds, determine the Rules of its Proceedings, punish its Members for disorderly Behavior, and expel a Member.”
That sounds right to me. So if the Constitution does not specify exactly how the senate can change its rules, this threat will hang over the senate forever. As ruthless as Reid has been on other matters, why doesn’t he try to take advantage? Maybe he is afraid of losing 10 seats (including his) in November?
2/3rds to expel. Simple majority to censure or changes the respective house rules. (see the most recent censure of Joe Wilson).
See #8. Think about passing obamacare, crap and trade, amnesty, card check, tax hikes, various "minority rights" laws, etc. etc. with 50 votes + Biden. Repubs are unlikely to get 2/3 majorities to override vetoes this year.
The institutional memory, and affection, of the filibuster is too strong for the members to walk away from. The filibuster isn't a party power, but an individual power making individual Senators that much more important. That kind of power is too intoxicating to dump.
If the Senate abandons the filibuster, even under the pretense of a temporary arrangement, the complexion of the Senate will change for generations to come. It would become precisely like the House. A Senator doesn't want to be precisely like a Representative. That's why it's not going to happen - but, I could be wrong. I don't put anything past the Rats, especially when there's people like Al Franken who are clearly so contemptuous of the history and tradition of the Senate.
"Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find only things evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached." - Manuel II Palelogus
Reid can read the handwriting on the wall. The filibuster will be all the rats have left after 2010 for a good long time.
Obviously, Reid has said he won’t try to change the filibuster rule. The consensus in this thread seems to be that without the filibuster, senators would lose individual power. But they would still have considerable individual power with a 55 vote filibuster rule.
yes, and maybe Dingbat Harry knows he could not even get 51 votes for changing the rules.... I don’t know but there might be enough Dims who realize that it would come back to hurt them as soon as they are in the minority again.
Yeah, I think that's probably right. I don't think he's got even the 50 (he's got Biden, for sure). I hope that's right. But, these Democrats are an unsavory and highly unpredictable lot. Anything is possible, I guess.
Yep and would somebody please rid - that is run against this slime - us of this non-resident Senator?
The ecomomy is in the toilet and we have senators like Harkin wasting time and funds to propose changing the rules.....Oh how I dream of the day when we will have STATESMEN in our senate and house instead of these damn politicians.
The Supreme Court isn’t going to step into a dispute like this.
But the rules say that you need 2/3rd vote to change the rules. In order to use a majority to change the rules, you’d have to get a 2/3rds vote to change the rule that you need 2/3rds vote.
Or you could simply assert that 51 votes is enough, and get the parlimentarian to agree with you. But to do so would destroy any comity there still is.
Which means the day the other party had countrol, they’d change all the rules, again with majority vote. Maybe they’d strip committee assignments or something like that.
Congresscrooks.
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.