Filibuster

[BravesFan]

Yeah I did, I got tired of everyone using it to be a jackwagon to me. say stuff like "your name is fitting..." so I changed it to this.

I had a really lousy day on the boards , big nasty arguments that seemed like me against the mob..... may have carried that over to here...my bad

 

[BravesFan]

I just see no way to change the filibuster as both sides want it for when they are low man on the totem pole.

I just am sick of partisan politics. (and both are equally guilty) .

I used to use the example of the great old House Speaker Tip O'Niell and how he and his GOP friends used to get most of their compromises done at the Congressional in D.C. over scotch and smokes. They were friends, regardless of party affiliation, I used to say that this wasn't the case anymore. However, I no longer think this is true.

After reading a story about Macain and Hillary having a vodka drinking competition on the flight to eastern Europe I wonder if the pundits 24 hr news and the internet isn't really to blame.

 

[geni]

I'm not ignorant of anything. (well, not the subject at hand anyway) I realize exactly how party politics work. I am also in favor of very few new laws.

How do you know? Can you even name the last ten new laws passed in the US.

Oh and incerdently trying prevent new laws being passed simply moves power to the executive as they are the only ones left who can actualy do anything.

I would love for there to be gridlock to the point that the American public is forced into opening up the multiple party possiblities

No reason to think that gridlock would result in that.

as well as put the screws on the existing parties to work together better.

Why? Politicians tend to be rational actors and at the present time they have no insentive to work together.

a 60% majority required to pass votes would enable this in a faster manner.

See? I'm using this as a lever to try and force cooperation.

The problem is that you are trying to leaverage the destruction of your country to make your politicians become irrational actors. As a course of action I would suggest this has some flaws.

 

[geni]

I think you are forgetting the voter. The number one goal of all politicians is to get re-elected. If they are inactive, eventually the voter will replace them with someone willing to be more pro-active.

So far the more recently a US politician has been elected the less likely they are to cooperate. Its' only those who've been corrupted by washington politics that even consider it.

 

[JoeTheJuggler]

I just am sick of partisan politics. (and both are equally guilty) .

At least recently, I don't think that's true. I think the GOP has shown itself far more resistant to compromise. (There is nothing like the Norquist pledge among Democrats, for example.)

I used to use the example of the great old House Speaker Tip O'Niell and how he and his GOP friends used to get most of their compromises done at the Congressional in D.C. over scotch and smokes. They were friends, regardless of party affiliation, I used to say that this wasn't the case anymore. However, I no longer think this is true.

In the bigger picture, I'm not so sure things have changed as much as you might think. There has always been strong bitter partisan divides in our country. We did have that matter of a the bloodiest war in our history (The Civil War)--the ultimate failure of the political process.

 

[JoeTheJuggler]

I just see no way to change the filibuster as both sides want it for when they are low man on the totem pole.

I think the only thing that needs fixing is the fact that the traditional check on the abuse of the filibuster (threat of the "nuclear option") currently only cuts one way. Everyone knows the Democratic Party will not pull the trigger so any threat it might make would be empty. Not so with the GOP.

I'm not sure how to fix that, but it might change with changing political tides anyway.

 

[BravesFan]

I don't believe that. and frankly I,m sick of every bloody liberal on this board saying that the GOP is the problem and when I point out both sides do the same thing, denying at and point their fingers at me and yelling"witch".

Both sides have done the exact same ****** things, and both will do them again. Just because your president is in there doesn't mean the GOP should just fold to his demands.

They have a responsibility to their constituents just as the Dem's do.

Stop pretending that your side is all hope and glory and the gOP is nothing but evil demon lords. They are both politicians. Trying to pretend one side has the high road is ludicrous claptrap.

 

[geni]

I don't believe that. and frankly I,m sick of every bloody liberal on this board saying that the GOP is the problem

You will withdraw that acusation.

and when I point out both sides do the same thing, denying at and point their fingers at me and yelling"witch".

Both sides have done the exact same ****** things,

Your position is that there are only two sides?


The reality is that at the present time the US republican party have made greated use of blocking tactics than the democratic party. Of course I suppose you could argue that the democrats are better at killing things early on.

and both will do them again. Just because your president is in there doesn't mean the GOP should just fold to his demands.

He's not my president. I understand that the British constitutional settlement can be complicated but we have had a king/queen since 1660.

They have a responsibility to their constituents just as the Dem's do.

Stop pretending that your side is all hope and glory and the gOP is nothing but evil demon lords. They are both politicians. Trying to pretend one side has the high road is ludicrous claptrap.

The problem with the "they all suck" argument is that you do not act as if this is the case.

 

[Tsukasa Buddha]

I don't believe that. and frankly I,m sick of every bloody liberal on this board saying that the GOP is the problem and when I point out both sides do the same thing, denying at and point their fingers at me and yelling"witch".

Both sides have done the exact same ****** things, and both will do them again. Just because your president is in there doesn't mean the GOP should just fold to his demands.

They have a responsibility to their constituents just as the Dem's do.

Stop pretending that your side is all hope and glory and the gOP is nothing but evil demon lords. They are both politicians. Trying to pretend one side has the high road is ludicrous claptrap.

I agree with you on quite a bit. As geni pointed out, they are rational actors trying to succeed under the same system. I just don't agree with your solution.

Obama is my President in the same sense that he is also yours, but no more than that.

 

[Muldur]

Some of us complain they do too much. I'm fine with gridlock. It's when Congress gets busy that I start getting nervous.

1) When a majority of people vote for a particular agenda, they have every right to see that agenda enacted.

2) The problems we are up against right now cannot be ignored w/o serious repercussions down the road. We need to get things fixed . To do that, Congress must pass the needed bills.

"Doing nothing" is not an option. It's a perscription for disaster.

 

[Muldur]

Which then allows the party with the slimmest of a majority to basically do whatever it wants to do.

There is a recourse: elections every 2-4 years.

ETA: Also the courts.

 

[Muldur]

Nope, my plan to increase the quality of our laws and help diminish the filibusters usage is to increase passage to 60%.

But , I tend to think gridlock is a good thing for republics.

So, Congress should argue while the nation burns?

 

[Muldur]

I think you are forgetting the voter. The number one goal of all politicians is to get re-elected. If they are inactive, eventually the voter will replace them with someone willing to be more pro-active.

Not so. In the last round of elections, the Tea Party wingnuts were sent to Washington with the express brief to gum up the works to keep Obama from getting anything done.

Then the same wingnuts point to his "lack of accomplishment" as somehow being proof that he should not be re-elected.

Thing is, Obama is apparently perfectly willing to do end-runs around a "do-nothing Congress", and there are a LOT of people (myself included) who know that inaction is the worst thing the US can have happen right now and will back him up on that.

 

[Muldur]

I think there is some value in codifying into our law making process that some decisions are simply "bigger" and should require more people to be behind them a simple 50%.

As it stands now once a party has a Supermajority the other party might as well not show up. I pale to think what the party in power could do it all it took was a simple majority.

Imagine it all it took was a simple majority to push though a Constitutional Amendment? *Shudders*

No one should have to point out the quantitative and qualitative difference between changing the founding documents of our government and passing needed bills to keep the day-to-day functions operating properly.

 

[JoeTheJuggler]

I don't believe that. and frankly I,m sick of every bloody liberal on this board saying that the GOP is the problem and when I point out both sides do the same thing, denying at and point their fingers at me and yelling"witch".

You've really got a persecution complex or something. Please try to stick to the content of posts and don't personalize everything.

And you have mischaracterized my post about the relative blame for the lack of compromise in the Senate in the last few years. I rejected your assertion that the parties are equally blameworthy and pointed out that the GOP is more blameworthy. I certainly never claimed that the GOP is solely blameworthy.

I agree that both sides share at least some blame--that is, that both sides do the same thing. I just don't think recently they're guilty in equal measures.


Again, in support of my position, there is nothing like the Norquist pledge among Democrats. It's difficult to think parties are negotiating in good faith when they have taken such a pledge.

There's also the simple facts regarding the use of the filibuster. In the 111th Congress, Senate Republicans broke the filibuster record (requiring over 100 cloture votes in the first 11 months). Source.

 

[Beerina]

I think the only thing that needs fixing is the fact that the traditional check on the abuse of the filibuster (threat of the "nuclear option") currently only cuts one way. Everyone knows the Democratic Party will not pull the trigger so any threat it might make would be empty. Not so with the GOP.

Um, no we don't know that about the Democrats. They've threatened it 2x already since the GOP did, so please spare me.

Yes, I'm sure the GOP thinks about it all the time, when they aren't planning to rape babies to death.