The filibuster has to go

Cypress said:
Nope.

Republicans made historic, relentless, and unprecedented use of the filibuster to block Obama's appointments prior to 2013.

That form of blatant abuse of the filibuster is what opened these floodgates
Click to expand...

and I remember Bush still trying to get appointments confirmed in August.....
 
It's an interesting debate. One can be philosophically opposed to the filibuster. There's also an element of partisan politics involved and the desire to say "we have control now so lets end it". Read a couple of interesting articles from people on the left about being careful what we wish for because we won't have control forever and Republicans can do a lot of damage when they return back to power.
 
cawacko said:
It's an interesting debate. One can be philosophically opposed to the filibuster. There's also an element of partisan politics involved and the desire to say "we have control now so lets end it". Read a couple of interesting articles from people on the left about being careful what we wish for because we won't have control forever and Republicans can do a lot of damage when they return back to power.
Click to expand...

Exactly. Democrats always shoot themselves in the foot for immediate gratification then whine like bitches when it is used against them later.
 
The Senate itself needs to go, at least as a legislative body.
It is the cause of rural right wing extremists being wildly over-represented in government relative to their number.

It can preserved as a House of Lords type body, but doesn't need to be involved in legislation.
We are the oldest continuing democracy, although we often don't function as one, and thus the most obsolete,
Modern democracies in more progressive nations are far more efficient.
And for those who claim that we weren't founded as a democracy, then it's time to fix that as well.
 
PostmodernProphet said:
and I remember Bush still trying to get appointments confirmed in August.....
Click to expand...

-- Relentless and Massive Use of the Filibuster Began with Republicans in 2007, and Accelerated When Obama Became President --

"The number of times senators have filed a motion to invoke cloture — the first step in ending a filibuster — has more than doubled between George W. Bush’s presidency and Trump’s presidency. It first spiked dramatically in 2007, when Republicans lost their Senate majority in the 2006 midterms and began using the filibuster much more aggressively than either party had in the past. The trend only accelerated after Obama took office in 2009."

https://www.google.com/amp/s/fiveth...ocrats-considering-ending-the-filibuster/amp/
 
anatta said:
the bench does not legislate
Click to expand...

Fucking A they don't! What do you think Citizens United and Heller were? New constitutional ideas produced from whole cloth (billions in donations to candidates is "free speech" and guns cannot be restricted for "personal defense", neither of which the framers ever envisioned).
 
cawacko said:
It's an interesting debate. One can be philosophically opposed to the filibuster. There's also an element of partisan politics involved and the desire to say "we have control now so lets end it". Read a couple of interesting articles from people on the left about being careful what we wish for because we won't have control forever and Republicans can do a lot of damage when they return back to power.
Click to expand...

They'll do that anyway.

In the meantime, we need to repair a democracy that the GOP has destroyed. That means DC statehood, it means rapid filing of judicial nominees, and it means getting people covid relief, right now.
 
NiftyNiblick said:
The Senate itself needs to go, at least as a legislative body.
It is the cause of rural right wing extremists being wildly over-represented in government relative to their number.

It can preserved as a House of Lords type body, but doesn't need to be involved in legislation.
We are the oldest continuing democracy, although we often don't function as one, and thus the most obsolete,
Modern democracies in more progressive nations are far more efficient.
And for those who claim that we weren't founded as a democracy, then it's time to fix that as well.
Click to expand...

Agreed, 100% It's the epitome of anti-democracy.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top