Jump to content

Abolish the filibuster!

Hugo Stiglitz

By Hugo Stiglitz
in Cloak Room

 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 836
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

Beantown Express 2.0
Beantown Express 2.0

I would bet 9/10 Americans think the filibuster is a menu item at Dairy Queen.

Ghost of LL
Ghost of LL

It is this simple for Democrats: end the filibuster or die. If they don't end the filibuster and pass HR1, then it is clear that the Republicans are going to enact enough voter suppression and pu

Hugo Stiglitz
Hugo Stiglitz

Kamala Harris’s replacement kinda rules.  

Posted Images

Mrs Whiggins

Mrs Whiggins 13049

Posted
Posted
55 minutes ago, Beantown Express 2.0 said:

What I don’t understand is what the Manchin’s of the world think will happen and how this helps the country.  Same goes for Biden.  I understand trying to get bipartisan legislation on everything or even anything but if one side of the aisle refuses to participate then you end up with nothing.  Nothing is exactly what McConnell wants so the Dems have nothing to show when the mid terms occur so its a win for Republicans to sit on their hands and refuse to pass any legislation.  Then the R’s can scream “look at the Dems, they have done nothing for you.  If you would just elect us to get a majority in the house and senate then we can really help you with jobs, healthcare, unicorns and rainbows for every American, etc….”  Sadly if they do get control of Congress we will see non stop hearings on  executions of Hunter Biden, Hillary, Fauci and all those other important fascist things that really help bring glee to certain people in our society and cruelty to other the American citizen(s).  

Fixed that one last sentence.

49 minutes ago, Biff Tannen said:

I don’t get it either. Again, as I’ve said before, Biden and the Dems act like they are smarter than the game, but in reality the game has changed and passed them by. 

 

2 minutes ago, David Dennison said:

It has nothing to do with Republicans or bipartisanship. That's just cover for the fact that they can't change the rules or pass legislation because of Democrats.

 

At one time I had the concern that the reluctance was related to the lesson that was taught by Wisconsin Republicans enacting some legislation that was then turned around and used on them. In other words, would erasing the filibuster enable a fascist/anti-democratic leadership to annihilate the competition without recourse. I've come to the conclusion that there may be no other choice but to take the risk due to concurrent events. @bad_teammate's point regarding the Senate demographic as well as @Biff Tannen's drive this home. They are out of sync in a way similar to many rural Americans with that feeling that something isn't quite right but have given up on masterful thoughtful ways to attack what is holding them back.

It's the infrastructure and they are reluctant to go green and try something new and different. That fear is going to be hard to overcome, but regardless if they don't, they're facing a much worse outcome. All of us are.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Js1

Js1 85110

Posted
Posted
12 minutes ago, Bama Chick said:

Yasssssss King!
 

Good, that's 1 of the more bigger names off the board of reluctant D senators.  Feinstein, Manchin, Sinema, Shaheen.  Would like a definitive statement from Kelly (he's been a bit wishy-washy). 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
David Dennison

David Dennison 18660

Posted
Posted
39 minutes ago, Mrs Whiggins said:

Fixed that one last sentence.

 

At one time I had the concern that the reluctance was related to the lesson that was taught by Wisconsin Republicans enacting some legislation that was then turned around and used on them. In other words, would erasing the filibuster enable a fascist/anti-democratic leadership to annihilate the competition without recourse. I've come to the conclusion that there may be no other choice but to take the risk due to concurrent events. @bad_teammate's point regarding the Senate demographic as well as @Biff Tannen's drive this home. They are out of sync in a way similar to many rural Americans with that feeling that something isn't quite right but have given up on masterful thoughtful ways to attack what is holding them back.

It's the infrastructure and they are reluctant to go green and try something new and different. That fear is going to be hard to overcome, but regardless if they don't, they're facing a much worse outcome. All of us are.

Whatever the reason, Republicans aren't blocking reform. Democrats are. And that sucks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Biff Tannen

Biff Tannen 45499

Posted
Posted
12 minutes ago, Satchel said:

If the the current version of the filibuster is abolished, Senators will be forced to engage debate if they have any hope of influencing legislation. They will no longer be able to phone in obstruction,

That’s what sucks so hard. They don’t even have to abolish it entirely (though that is my preferred option), just merely make it what it used to be. Make these dipshits talk. The entire idea that they just get to say “filibuster!” to obstruct is fucking asinine. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Js1

Js1 85110

Posted
Posted (edited)
18 minutes ago, Biff Tannen said:

That’s what sucks so hard. They don’t even have to abolish it entirely (though that is my preferred option), just merely make it what it used to be. Make these dipshits talk. The entire idea that they just get to say “filibuster!” to obstruct is fucking asinine. 

Not even just that.

1.  Filibuster should require the commitment to talking.

2. You can control what is allowed to be filibustered.  It was nuked for SCOTUS nominations and cabinet nominations.  Why it is necessary for things like voting rights legislation or statehood bills?  I can understand it's use for things like spending bills, though you can just use reconciliation to get around that.  It's so arbitrary.

3. Put more onus on the minority to sustain a filibuster (keep 41 votes on the floor) than the majority to overturn it (60 to end debate).  It's such an important "tool" for the minority, according to so many, so make the minority have to do the work to keep 41 votes on the floor.  Or require 60% of the attendance in the Chamber to override.  8 Republicans and 2 Dems are out of the chamber/away from DC?  Only takes 54 now.  

Edited by Js1
  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Satchel

Satchel 6908

Posted
Posted
7 minutes ago, Js1 said:

Not even just that.

1.  Filibuster should require the commitment to talking.

2. You can control what is allowed to be filibustered.  It was nuked for SCOTUS nominations and cabinet nominations.  Why it is necessary for things like voting rights legislation or statehood bills?  I can understand it's use for things like spending bills, though you can just use reconciliation to get around that.  It's so arbitrary.

3. Put more onus on the minority to sustain a filibuster (keep 41 votes on the floor) than the majority to overturn it (60 to end debate).  It's such an important "tool" for the minority, according to so many, so make the minority have to do the work to keep 41 votes on the floor.  Or require 60% of the attendance in the Chamber to override.  8 Republicans and 2 Dems are out of the chamber/away from DC?  Only takes 54 now.  

This^ 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Js1

Js1 85110

Posted
Posted (edited)

Also Democrats and activists need to now go full-bore for 2022.  Do not get pissed off and blow off 2022.  

  • Elect Democrats in WI, NC, PA
  • Hold NV, NH, AZ, GA
  • Make plays in FL and OH
  • Choose someone way more progressive in California to replace DiFi
  • Don't waste any money in Alabama, Alaska, Iowa (if Grassley runs again), Kansas, Kentucky, Missouri, South Carolina - literally do not donate a single cent to these pointless races.  Fuck Jaime Harrison and Amy McGrath for siphoning so much cash for blowout races.

Get at least 53 seats and suddenly Manchin and Sinema can do whatever they want to their heart's content, because you can lose both and still nuke the filibuster.  Add DC in 2023 and suddenly you have 2 more seats (55), which is a really nice cushion for 2024 (Manchin, Sinema, Tester, Brown up). 

Edited by Js1
  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Like 2
  • Fuck Around and Find Out 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Zonahorn

Zonahorn 8079

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, Js1 said:

Good, that's 1 of the more bigger names off the board of reluctant D senators.  Feinstein, Manchin, Sinema, Shaheen.  Would like a definitive statement from Kelly (he's been a bit wishy-washy). 

Don’t worry about Kelly, he’ll do the right thing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
kevwun

kevwun 15653

Posted
Posted (edited)

Manchin just got re-elected and is old enough where he could retire and is already wealthy from his political career.  He needs to put the fate of the country ahead of his fucking re-election concerns.  Shut about about decorum and tradition when the fucking Republicans are actively trying to destroy our Democracy through voter suppression.  You don't get to be a pacifist when the enemy is at the gates.

Edited by kevwun
  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bama Chick

Bama Chick 28596

Posted
Posted

When Joe Manchin shows up on the senate floor in a “Vote for Pancho” t-shirt and a lime green wig to mime finger guns while voting no on gun legislation, I will absolutely lose it and will not be held responsible for the filth that comes out of my mouth.

  • Fuck Around and Find Out 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Js1

Js1 85110

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, David Dennison said:

How would that pass muster given Shelby County v. Holder?

“In order to prevent more restrictive laws from being passed without federal pre-clearance, it became necessary for the U.S. Government to find a new formula for the Voting Rights Act that would satisfy the Shelby County v. Holder decision, which is what the John Lewis Voting Rights Act was written to do.”

It was designed to accommodate that decision. Here’s something from UNT: https://accessiblelaw.untdallas.edu/how-john-lewis-voting-rights-act-would-fix-constitutional-issues-voting-rights-act-1964-created

Quote

How the John Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act addresses the constitutionality of the coverage formula. 

In July 2020, Senator Leahy—along with 46 other co-sponsors—filed the John Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act, which seeks to create a new coverage formula in response to the Shelby County decision.37 The bill would amend the VRA’s coverage formula to meet the “current burdens” and “current needs” standard discussed by the Shelby Countymajority opinion.

First, the legislation would make preclearance apply statewide for any State  where:

  • 15 or more voting rights violations occurred in the State during the previous 25 years; or 
  • Ten or more voting rights violations occurred within the previous 25 years, and the State itself committed at least one of them.38

The term “voting rights violations” in the legislation would include any violations of the 14th or 15th Amendments, violations of any provisions of the legislation itself, or any violation of federal law that “prohibits discrimination in voting on the basis of race, color, or membership in a language minority group.”39

Similarly, the preclearance requirement would also apply to any political subdivision “during a calendar year if three or more voting rights violations occurred in the subdivision during the previous 25 years.”40 This change creates a rolling basis for which the preclearance requirement will apply. In other words, it will continually move to meet the “current needs” without further amendment by Congress. 

Second, if a state or subdivision is covered by preclearance, the applicable period is limited to 10 years.41 Thus, unlike the formula considered by Shelby County, the applicable time will automatically expire if the jurisdiction complies with the above. And unlike the prior formula, the legislation provides that a jurisdiction can come out of preclearance coverage if it establishes a clean record.42

 The Act proposed to make several other much-needed reforms to the VRA. But the above-listed changes to the preclearance coverage formula would address the Supreme Court’s basis for finding the original formula unconstitutional.

 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Biff Tannen

Biff Tannen 45499

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, Bama Chick said:

When Joe Manchin shows up on the senate floor in a “Vote for Pancho” t-shirt and a lime green wig to mime finger guns while voting no on gun legislation, I will absolutely lose it and will not be held responsible for the filth that comes out of my mouth.

I don't know what this means, but all I'm thinking is

tenor.gif?itemid=18505089

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
David Dennison

David Dennison 18660

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, Js1 said:

“In order to prevent more restrictive laws from being passed without federal pre-clearance, it became necessary for the U.S. Government to find a new formula for the Voting Rights Act that would satisfy the Shelby County v. Holder decision, which is what the John Lewis Voting Rights Act was written to do.”

It was designed to accommodate that decision. Here’s something from UNT: https://accessiblelaw.untdallas.edu/how-john-lewis-voting-rights-act-would-fix-constitutional-issues-voting-rights-act-1964-created

 

Thank you.

Are ten Republicans on board?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Js1

Js1 85110

Posted
Posted

I will say I don’t think Manchin is playing the best political game here. If you want 10 Republicans to vote for the JLVRA, then you have to keep HR1 in your back pocket.

“Support this or we blow the filibuster  and pass HR1.  Your move, senate GOP” 

Now there’s no incentive for 9 other GOP to support the JLVRA

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Biff Tannen

Biff Tannen 45499

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, Js1 said:

I will say I don’t think Manchin is playing the best political game here. If you want 10 Republicans to vote for the JLVRA, then you have to keep HR1 in your back pocket.

“Support this or we blow the filibuster  and pass HR1.  Your move, senate GOP” 

Now there’s no incentive for 9 other GOP to support the JLVRA

I think it's because Manchin is a traitor just like the other Rs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Satchel

Satchel 6908

Posted
Posted
44 minutes ago, Js1 said:

If he was a traitor he would make Mitch the Senate Majority Leader.  538’s tracker has him at 100% Biden score. 

Those votes are deposits he’ll withdrawn from as his political currency dwindles. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
bad_teammate

bad_teammate 13132

Posted
Posted (edited)
3 hours ago, David Dennison said:

What kind of effort would you like to see to get the results you want?

I like the "you want" here. It's a cute rhetorical way of dismissing the importance of HR1 up against the ever-important goal of defending whichever Democratic Party leader is under scrutiny.

But the answer is very simple: Biden needs to be physically in WV and Arizona giving speeches about the importance of HR1 and the damage their Senators are doing by standing in the way of its passage. He should be in Phoenix AZ or Charleston WV on June 19th doing exactly that. He should bring rival politicians onstage and do photo-ops, raised hands together poses, etc...

He needs to wield the power of the bully pulpit to force these representatives into line

3 hours ago, kevwun said:

and then he'll find something wrong with that.  He always dangles the carrot.

LEAVE DEMOCRATIC POWERPLAYERS ALONE!

 

Edited by bad_teammate
  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
JimmyJames

JimmyJames 12271

Posted
Posted
4 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

I like the "you want" here. It's a cute rhetorical way of dismissing the importance of HR1 up against the ever-important goal of defending whichever Democratic Party leader is under scrutiny.

But the answer is very simple: Biden needs to be physically in WV and Arizona giving speeches about the importance of HR1 and the damage their Senators are doing by standing in the way of its passage. He should be in Phoenix AZ or Charleston WV on June 19th doing exactly that. He should bring rival politicians onstage and do photo-ops, raised hands together poses, etc...

He needs to wield the power of the bully pulpit to force these representatives into line

LEAVE DEMOCRATIC POWERPLAYERS ALONE!

 

While I don’t necessarily disagree with you how do you think it would change anything in West Virginia?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
JimmyJames

JimmyJames 12271

Posted
Posted

The dems actually have a decent shot of expanding their lead in the senate in 2022 to make manchin irrelevant. They also need to focus on the house though and not let republican lies on Spanish radio go unanswered. The house will be close thanks to redistricting. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
bad_teammate

bad_teammate 13132

Posted
Posted
Just now, JimmyJames said:

While I don’t necessarily disagree with you how do you think it would change anything in West Virginia?

It's not just about West Virginia. It's a shot across the bow of every single member of the Democratic caucus who would rebel against core and immovable values. And most importantly, it's the right fucking thing to do.

Neither you nor I know much about WV's internal politics beyond what national pundits regurgitate incessantly and the eternally-punditbrained class decides is Obviously True because it's repeated enough.

  • Hook 'Em 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
BillyBadAss

BillyBadAss 189

Posted
Posted

Why not strip the bill down? Remove virtually everything except the rules on gerrymandering. The rest will take care of itself once we get through a cycle where the extremists can't win primaries anymore.

Make them defend gerrymandering. Full stop.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mrs Whiggins

Mrs Whiggins 13049

Posted
Posted
34 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

I like the "you want" here. It's a cute rhetorical way of dismissing the importance of HR1 up against the ever-important goal of defending whichever Democratic Party leader is under scrutiny.

But the answer is very simple: Biden needs to be physically in WV and Arizona giving speeches about the importance of HR1 and the damage their Senators are doing by standing in the way of its passage. He should be in Phoenix AZ or Charleston WV on June 19th doing exactly that. He should bring rival politicians onstage and do photo-ops, raised hands together poses, etc...

He needs to wield the power of the bully pulpit to force these representatives into line

LEAVE DEMOCRATIC POWERPLAYERS ALONE!

 

I try and listen to the press briefings every day if I can, and I wasn't too happy with Psaki brushing off one of the questions regarding Biden's comments as it related to (what was obviously) Manchin and Simena. I think it would be outstanding if Biden would visit those states. I also think I understand his reluctance given the former CiC behavior, but this could be glossed over with the other pending legislation (infrastructure, etc). He has had somewhat good instincts for bringing us this far toward recovery (from the pandemic) but it's time to roll up the sleeves and take the momentum and go, go, go (that was a Dave reference if you haven't seen the movie)

Have you reached out to him via the contact info on WH Live? Seriously, do it if you haven't done so. You're pretty verbose so write up a brief statement/plea and let them know. I get that people think it's pointless, but even Dr. Fauci took the time to answer his 30,000 plus emails, so maybe someone will take your idea and run with it. If you don't ask, the answer is always no. Americans in West Virginia and Arizona need to see what representation looks like. America needs to know that representation matters. Otherwise, maybe we should all go to DC and show those insurrectionists what 81 million people marching for democracy looks like.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Neonmoon

Neonmoon 38127

Posted
Posted
25 minutes ago, BillyBadAss said:

Make them defend gerrymandering. Full stop

They already defended an insurrection. Do you think spinning a few yarns against gerrymandering makes them nervous? They don’t give a fuck. They use decency and shame as weapons against Democrats. Those weapons don’t work against Republicans. 

  • Hook 'Em 4
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
bad_teammate

bad_teammate 13132

Posted
Posted
5 minutes ago, Mrs Whiggins said:

He has had somewhat good instincts for bringing us this far toward recovery (from the pandemic) but it's time to roll up the sleeves and take the momentum and go, go, go

Like what? I mean that sincerely.

Trump would've been saying, "EVERYONE COME GET THE TRUMP VACCINE IT'S SO FABULOUS" and the same people would've been planning mass vax events/locations and administering. We'd probably have higher vax rates under Trump because of how stupid Republicans are.

And the economic recovery is a natural outcome of the virus relenting.

Quote

Have you reached out to him via the contact info on WH Live?

I don't know what this means.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
 Share
Go to topic listing


Football ... Basketball ... Baseball ... Other Sports ... Futbol ... 🤫995🤫 ... Gambling ... Movies & TV ... Music ... Hobbies ... Lulz ... Food & Travel ... Daily Texan ... Business and Markets ... Cloak Room ... Help ... For Sale ... Board Discussion ... Subscribe!... Donate!... Advertise... COOKIE MONSTER!

×
×
  • Create New...