Replies

“There is nothing in the Constitution about a supermajority for all legislation that gets considered by the Senate, it is simply a Senate tradition.”

I like traditions. Some of them. The fillibuster is one of those “informal amendments,” like judicial review, (originally) the two-term president, that works. Some of the time.

I like some traditions. I don't like this one. It was invented at a time when communications were by horseback, and people needed some time to get word to the frontier. It was invented at a time when people actually had to stand up and filibuster on the Senate floor, which naturally limited its length. It was perpetuated by legislators intent on defending slavery, and then on defending segregation, and then on defending the socialist programs of an era when the socialists were able to muster 60 votes. Because of that one time anomaly during a depression when another Republican president soured the country on Republicans 70 years ago, we are forever saddled with an anti-constitutional socialist welfare state that only grows, never shrinks. You hear complaints about how government programs always grow, and we can never get rid of them. Guess why....because you can never get 60 votes to get rid of them.

During the Reagan era, we could have gotten rid of the DOE and we could have actually accomplished some things if there was no filibuster. During the Gingrich congress, there was a Dem President, so we effectively needed 67 votes, but during Bush's era, the Senate was where judges, tax cuts and budget cuts went to die. GOP weak-kneed lily livers gave up and threw in with the socialists, and that is why we have the mess we have now. Let's try governing, and that requires 50 percent plus one, not 60 percent. Let the Dems win their little votes now, let's make sure they know we are going to run on a platform of getting rid of not 2 years of socialism but 70, and then get rid of them with a majority vote.

What was it Obama said--"I won, deal with it." It's our turn next time.