Posted on 12/24/2010 1:03:52 PM PST by reaganaut1
Frustrated by regular filibusters and other procedural blockades, Senate Democrats are urging their leadership to negotiate with Republicans to change the rules that govern how the Senate does business.
The Democrats would leave intact the ability of the minority party to filibuster legislation and nominations, meaning that in most cases it would still take 60 votes to get anything done in the Senate. But they want to require senators to be on the floor if they intend to try to debate a bill to death and would make other changes to streamline the Senate’s operations, including ending the practice of secret “holds” by a single senator on legislation or nominees.
Republicans are likely to resist, and should no compromise be found, some Democrats are prepared to propose their own package of rules changes on the first day of the session. Doing so could touch off a bitter floor fight, escalate the already high partisan tensions in the chamber and hinder President Obama’s ability to advance legislation.
In a letter to Senator Harry Reid, the majority leader, Democratic senators expressed “strong sentiment” for ending what they see as Republican misuse of Senate process in recent years.
“We believe the current abuse of the rules by the minority threatens the ability of the Senate to do the necessary work of the nation, and we urge you to take steps to bring these abuses of our rules to an end,” said the Dec. 18 letter signed by 56 Democrats and independents, including all Democratic senators remaining in the Congress that opens Jan. 5.
Republicans have cautioned against any unilateral move to rewrite Senate procedure, saying Democrats would regret it if they fall back into the minority.
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
I would like to see filibusters required to be actual filibusters, not merely a vote on cloture. Make all business come to a stop and the person(s) required to keep talking.
Left or right, a filibuster should *hurt*.
TRANSLATION: Democrats want the same power with 53 that they had with 60.
Call it "The Daschle Rule". It was designed to allow the Democrats to control debate from their couches.
I’m not conversant on the ins and outs of Senate procedure. But I will say this. If the Democrats think it is a good idea, it probably isn’t, so I’m against it.
FILIBUSTER?
WHEN?
DEMOCRATS HAVE ALMOST GOTTEN WHAT THEY WANTED UNDER MCCONNELL’S WATCH.
ARE THEY STILL PLANNING FOR MORE NEW MEGA-TRILLION LAWS?
GEESH!
Yes. I’m shouting and McConnell is indeed the worst Republican Caucus Leader in history!
OLDPUPPYMAX SAID:
TRANSLATION: Democrats want the same power with 53 that they had with 60.
55555555555555555555555555555555555555555555!
PST........... MCCONNELL! HEAR! HEAR!
How about read all bills and if you intend to voye you must attend the whols reading. Time off for funerals excluded.
Zero earmarks. Ban them forever.
And in 2 more years or 4 or 6, the Dems will abuse the power they asked for.
“they may get what they wish for... and in two years, as minority party, they may regret like never before, their grab for power.”
Whether the dems are the minority party in two years very much depends on how the repubs behave and vote between now and then. So far, they’re disappointing (to wit, votes on START and repeal of DADT). But...we’ll see how they perform (in House and Senate as well) with the new kids being sworn in.
“However, woe be the R who votes or agrees to that as they WILL BE TOAST at when they run again in their next election.”
My dad often says that the one thing the Founding Fathers should’ve done, but didn’t, was put term limits for congress (both houses) in the Constitution. I concur, and also think there should be the following revision: for the House - four year terms, limited to two (or three at most); for the Senate - four year terms, also limited to two or three at most. Senators should have to run more often, and House members shouldn’t have to start fundraising as soon as they’re sworn in.
Thoughts?
Good job Frank!
Of course they’re trying to change the Senate rules - it’s called “corruption”.
And I’m sure a bunch of RINOs will go along with it and lecture us about “Democracy in Action” or whatever.
I agree. That’s why we need Palin to whip them back into shape. She excercises more guts while still smiling and grinning and laughing than they have ever known in their whole political lives, in their most intense moments...
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.