I think the filibuster should go back to its original version. I know it would be a lot of work and theatrics, but if they actually had to keep talking instead of just saying “filibuster” then it would take a high level of commitment to stop legislation. I’m open to the possibility that I’m wrong on this, but it does seem like a reasonable alternative. If the ruling party wants to do any other work, they would have to withdraw the legislation. If it’s important enough, you push through.
so, this got changed for a reason. a talking filibuster for everything gives the minority way more power, because it eats up time. it would effectively make the chamber unusable, and no majority is going to allow that. so a talking filibuster is essentially just an argument for eliminating it with an extra step.
That was Sinema’s argument so perhaps I’m just loathe to agree with her. I think the GOP would potentially fail to pass unpopular national legislation for the same reason they failed to repeal the ACA. Also, bills passed on a majority basis are easier to overturn when Dems gain control. That said, I get the concern but I am leaning toward let democracy happen, as it is already on the state level.
I think the gop has gotten more radical. and I think they would repeal the aca now.
Sinema was wrong because it's important to be the one to nuke the filibuster first! Like, it's worth it to try to pass your stuff, especially on voting, in an effort to restore democracy. But that's a very different argument from saying, "well we couldn't do it ourselves so root for the gop to do it first and disenfranchise our voters so we never get elected again."
"That doesn’t meant Democrats should stop fighting, or should cave on important priorities like health care or the power of the purse. But I think people should think twice before cavalierly dismissing the dangers of this Senate, with this president, this House, and this Supreme Court, enacting any and all legislation with only 50 Senators."
THANK YOU! One of the worst things about Donald Trump is how he convinces Corporate Clinton Neoliberals (hey, they always say "The Left" like we're more than a bunch of individuals—so I'm returning the favor!) to abandon everything that keeps America from turning into a dictatorship:
● First it's people seriously suggesting the U.S. Military engage in a *coup d'etat* to arrest the Executive Branch of the U.S. Government (because history has shown us that Militaries ALWAYS happily give power back after they've deposed a disliked leader!);
● Now it's "Hey, let's get rid of the filibuster so that when WE'RE back in power WE can screw the Republicans!" (That assumes that, in the 12 months between now and the 2026 Midterm Elections, Trump doesn't bully or sweet-talk the Republicans into ending any vestige of a Democratic Republic and crown him "Emperor Donnie Pantload I"....)
It's kind of sad that we have to rely on the REPUBLICAN Senate saying "Yeah...No" to this, because they know how valuable the filibuster is....
I agree about the horrible shit they would likely do but the filibuster insulates the gop base and GOP senators from the reality of what the gop is doing, their base doesn’t believe Trump wants to ban abortion nationwide, kill food stamps or destroy ss Medicaid Medicare, filibuster needs to go because we can’t fix this mess without normie people and some maga seeing reality. The fact the gop caves to everything Trump asks EXCEPT this tells you they know the score, we’ll never get dc or Puerto Rico statehood or expanded scotus without killing the filibuster and that’s what it’s gonna take to stop this collapsing state. Also SCOTUS didn’t say he was immune from all acts just “official” making SCOTUS the ultimate deciders on if Trump goes to jail or not so he can’t piss them off too much or they’ll just deem whatever they want an “unofficial act”
so, they didn't seem insulated earlier this month, right? they got their asses handed to them.
in general, voters aren't paying attention at all. they don't know who does what with the filibuster; they won't know without it. all they know is whether their lives are shit, and if they are they just blame whoever's president. the filibuster would allow the gop to do a lot of horrible things...but also to *destroy voting rights* which would make the gop *muh less accountable*, not more accountable.
I disagree. The filibuster enhances the structural disadvantage Democrats have in the Senate. Getting rid of it may be the only way of being able to address that situation by adding more states to the union.
You make a reasonable case for keeping the filibuster. Even so, I think it should be weakened to put a little more cost on the minority. Instead of requiring 60 votes for cloture, require 41 votes against cloture to block it. If you plan to block the majority, you should at least show up to vote.
I think the filibuster should go back to its original version. I know it would be a lot of work and theatrics, but if they actually had to keep talking instead of just saying “filibuster” then it would take a high level of commitment to stop legislation. I’m open to the possibility that I’m wrong on this, but it does seem like a reasonable alternative. If the ruling party wants to do any other work, they would have to withdraw the legislation. If it’s important enough, you push through.
so, this got changed for a reason. a talking filibuster for everything gives the minority way more power, because it eats up time. it would effectively make the chamber unusable, and no majority is going to allow that. so a talking filibuster is essentially just an argument for eliminating it with an extra step.
Thanks for explaining.
That was Sinema’s argument so perhaps I’m just loathe to agree with her. I think the GOP would potentially fail to pass unpopular national legislation for the same reason they failed to repeal the ACA. Also, bills passed on a majority basis are easier to overturn when Dems gain control. That said, I get the concern but I am leaning toward let democracy happen, as it is already on the state level.
I think the gop has gotten more radical. and I think they would repeal the aca now.
Sinema was wrong because it's important to be the one to nuke the filibuster first! Like, it's worth it to try to pass your stuff, especially on voting, in an effort to restore democracy. But that's a very different argument from saying, "well we couldn't do it ourselves so root for the gop to do it first and disenfranchise our voters so we never get elected again."
"That doesn’t meant Democrats should stop fighting, or should cave on important priorities like health care or the power of the purse. But I think people should think twice before cavalierly dismissing the dangers of this Senate, with this president, this House, and this Supreme Court, enacting any and all legislation with only 50 Senators."
THANK YOU! One of the worst things about Donald Trump is how he convinces Corporate Clinton Neoliberals (hey, they always say "The Left" like we're more than a bunch of individuals—so I'm returning the favor!) to abandon everything that keeps America from turning into a dictatorship:
● First it's people seriously suggesting the U.S. Military engage in a *coup d'etat* to arrest the Executive Branch of the U.S. Government (because history has shown us that Militaries ALWAYS happily give power back after they've deposed a disliked leader!);
● Now it's "Hey, let's get rid of the filibuster so that when WE'RE back in power WE can screw the Republicans!" (That assumes that, in the 12 months between now and the 2026 Midterm Elections, Trump doesn't bully or sweet-talk the Republicans into ending any vestige of a Democratic Republic and crown him "Emperor Donnie Pantload I"....)
It's kind of sad that we have to rely on the REPUBLICAN Senate saying "Yeah...No" to this, because they know how valuable the filibuster is....
I agree about the horrible shit they would likely do but the filibuster insulates the gop base and GOP senators from the reality of what the gop is doing, their base doesn’t believe Trump wants to ban abortion nationwide, kill food stamps or destroy ss Medicaid Medicare, filibuster needs to go because we can’t fix this mess without normie people and some maga seeing reality. The fact the gop caves to everything Trump asks EXCEPT this tells you they know the score, we’ll never get dc or Puerto Rico statehood or expanded scotus without killing the filibuster and that’s what it’s gonna take to stop this collapsing state. Also SCOTUS didn’t say he was immune from all acts just “official” making SCOTUS the ultimate deciders on if Trump goes to jail or not so he can’t piss them off too much or they’ll just deem whatever they want an “unofficial act”
so, they didn't seem insulated earlier this month, right? they got their asses handed to them.
in general, voters aren't paying attention at all. they don't know who does what with the filibuster; they won't know without it. all they know is whether their lives are shit, and if they are they just blame whoever's president. the filibuster would allow the gop to do a lot of horrible things...but also to *destroy voting rights* which would make the gop *muh less accountable*, not more accountable.
unfortunately.
The fact that they don't seem to want to go in for the kill is quite interesting
I disagree. The filibuster enhances the structural disadvantage Democrats have in the Senate. Getting rid of it may be the only way of being able to address that situation by adding more states to the union.
Makes sense. Its the only thing left that gives them the imprimatur of governing
You make a reasonable case for keeping the filibuster. Even so, I think it should be weakened to put a little more cost on the minority. Instead of requiring 60 votes for cloture, require 41 votes against cloture to block it. If you plan to block the majority, you should at least show up to vote.