Skip to comments.McConnell, Reid agree on rules reform package (filibusters 'mostly' intact)
Posted on 01/24/2013 10:46:56 AM PST by Sir Napsalot
Get ready for plenty of liberal howling over this outcome, because Harry Reid made the mistake of overpromising and underdelivering. Reids vow to use the nuclear option to get rid of the filibuster turned into only a limitation on how many filibusters the minority can stage on one issue. The filibuster otherwise lives even for judicial appointments, although somewhat restricted:
Yes, but the filibuster still applies, and the post-cloture debate was moot anyway. The only really significant changes to the filibuster itself is that it can no longer be applied to a motion to proceed, but only to a floor vote, and that Senators must be present to filibuster. It still takes 60 votes to gain cloture, and it still means that bills like, say, Dianne Feinsteins assault-weapons ban will have to gain significant Republican support to pass.
(Excerpt) Read more at hotair.com ...
This is good all around. The Democrats would have regretted this discision when the Republicans get the majority back someday. I think 60 votes for everything is a good thing quite frankly regardless of politics.
Just so we don’t get delusional, nor complacent about our current GOP reps in congress, I received this in my email this morning:
Dear Mr. XXXX,
Thank you for contacting me regarding the recent outbreak of shootings around the country.
Nothing I write in a letter feels like a satisfactory response to such an awful series of events. My heart goes out to the families of the victims of these unfathomable crimes. I simply do not have the words to encapsulate the anguish and loss they have experienced. As a wife, daughter and sister, my prayers are with the families who must now grapple with the absence of their own loved ones and family members.
Tragedies such as these raise many issues with regard to public policy and public welfare. As an elected official, I took an oath to uphold our Constitution, including the Second Amendment contained within it that guarantees the right to keep and bear arms. While I believe that law-abiding citizens should have this right protected, I also believe we should review our current legal safeguards and restrictions to ensure that they are being adequately enforced. I also believe we need to examine our laws to make sure that we are doing what we can to keep criminals and the mentally unstable from obtaining these weapons in the first place.
However, we must do more than just examine our firearms laws. Our efforts to address these tragedies must include a thorough reevaluation of our nation’s system for treating mental illness. Unfortunately, too often mental illness goes undiagnosed and untreated. We must focus on increasing public awareness of the symptoms of mental illness and on improving access to mental health services, with a goal of identifying and treating mental illness earlier on in those it affects. It is my hope that from these tragedies will emerge action that promotes better mental health diagnosis and treatment in the U.S.
I ask that you please keep the families of the victims in your thoughts and prayers.
Thank you again for contacting me on this important issue. I invite you to visit my website at www.JaimeHB.house.gov for additional information or to sign up to be kept up to date on these issues. Please do not hesitate to contact me if I can be of further assistance.
Jaime Herrera Beutler
Member of Congress
Unless something more comes out this sounds excellent.
The important thing is to make Reid’s crazy-liberal bloc unhappy.
Plenty of past experience says otherwise.
“Senators must be present to filibuster”
How about eliminating the unanimous consent. How about “senators must be present to vote”! That would be real senate reform.
This can be fixed of course any time, if any one senator had the balls to sit on the floor and deny any unanimous consent: “objection. Call the roll.”
And to those who say this would slow down the senate...nonsense. It would actually speed it up. Watch Cspan some time and see the innumerable roll call votes for no reason but delay. Those votes could be used on (gasp) actual legislation.
If the Dems take the House in 2014, just watch how fast ol’ Harry does a 180 and wipes out the filibuster. Ain’t nothing gonna stand in the way of the Progressive Legislation Rocket Sled if that happens.
If mcconnell thought the deal was done, just wait until the lyin’ reid doesn’t get his way. He’ll use that nuclear option in a NY minute.
Those roll calls are a function of taking attendance to determine whether or not a quorum is present. Of course, the clerk reading the roll knows there is no quorum, as ZERO senators are present. But, the formality of taking roll call keeps the senate open, even though no senator is there.
When the senate does contain a quorum, the action is fairly tightly scripted, according to agreements made in the back rooms.
I’m aware of the purpose of the quorum calls. They’re still stupid, annoying, meaningless, and should be fixed. Why would the president pro-tem at the time look out onto the floor and say “there are only three senators here including myself, under the Constitution a quorum must be present, therefore no business can be conducted” Of course they get around this by the constant call to quorum. And it’s circular and ridiculous.
In any case, unanimous consents should not be allowed unless a quorum is present. If 51 senators want to waive the reading of a bill or amendment by voice vote, that’s fine. But the calling of the yeas and nays should be the norm. Too many senators, especially republican senators who call themselves conservatives, hide behind their high ACU ratings because lots of legislation is passed by unanimous consent and cannot be attributed to any senator. It’s deceitful and dangerous.
Republican? From where?