Chris K

Chris K
Location
Buenos Aires, Buenos Aires (DF), Argentina
Birthday
January 11
Bio
I'm a starving artist and ramblin' man. Currently in Buenos Aires for art-related purposes.

MY RECENT POSTS

Chris K's Links

Salon.com
JANUARY 14, 2009 9:08AM

58 (or 59?) Senators and the importance of the filibuster

Rate: 4 Flag

Here I go writing about a subject about which I know little, so pardon any ignorances and please correct. It seems to me with a near "super"-majority in the Senate, the filibuster is a more important tool than ever. The last two years all the Republicans had to do was imply a filibuster and it was time to "compromise."

Undoubtedly the Republicans will continue this strategy even though they're almost in the "mega"-minority (I made that up). I think now is the time to allow the Republicans to make good on the threat. Put together an excellent stimulus package (for example) and get 56 or 57 Senators behind it and let the Republicans filibuster. Everyone loovvvves seeing our government get hung up by what would be seen as obstructionism. There's no better way to make an unpopular stance even more unpopular. Remember, a majority of 100 is just 51, not 60.

There is no reason for a continuation of the kind of BS that posed as compromise for the last 2 (or 8) years, basically giving in to all the Republicans' demands. Let them stop all the bills they don't like with filibusters. If nothing is getting done in the Senate, it will be overwhelmingly obvious who is at fault: the 41 Republicans and Joe Lieberman who won't let anything happen. If Republicans hope to return from the wilderness, filibustering would not be a wise move. The threat of the filibuster would no longer work because the reality of the filibuster would be so politically disastrous for the Republicans.

And maybe we could go back to a majority being a majority. That's what it takes to pass legislation.

Your tags:

TIP:

Enter the amount, and click "Tip" to submit!
Recipient's email address:
Personal message (optional):

Your email address:

Comments

Type your comment below:
Chris, I'm hoping that the press does a good job of covering any filibusters that may occur. It would be a travesty for the press to slack off on this kind of news story and to give a pass to the Republicans. The worst case scenario is for the press to make the public think that the Democratic majority can't get anything done. Given what I've seen of the main stream media over the past eight years this isn't such a far fetched concern.
I think the filibuster is often misunderstood by the public at large, who confuse it with ordinary bickering and don't understand its critical procedural importance.

Eliminating the filibuster and having all votes be by simple majority would be a disaster. The filibuster is a messy instrument, to be sure, but it is an important safeguard that works well if used sparingly and must be reserved for critical situations.

I wrote a longer comment on this but it was a little rough around the edges and I want to tidy it up before posting. I'll put it up as a blog hopefully sometime soon. I'll be curious in the interim to see others' responses to your post.

I do think the filibuster is often misunderstood.

See my article (offiste) on the use of the filibuster to block judicial appointments if you want a clue about the direction I'm headedwith this.
I wasn't suggesting we do away with the filibuster, not at all. More along the lines of allowing Republicans to decide if they want to put their political capital behind one, or just bluster about it. Put up or shut up, if you will.
By not forcing Republicans to actually use the filibuster we allow them to avoid all of the messiness of the filibuster.
Chris, a belated Happy Birthday to you!!
Nice post Chris. It will be very interesting to watch how the almost-super majorite Dems interact with their counterparts across the aisle. Being a card carrying D it pains me to say this but I agree with Kent - the filibuster can be useful. We'll see.
I'm not saying the filibuster can't be useful or should be done away with. I'm saying that there should be a political price if it is used foolishly. I am actually ENCOURAGING the use of the filibuster, rather than just the threat of its use.
I think the correct new term for the Republican Party position is "nanobot."
Dunno bout you all, but I'm pulling for the Whigs next time round...
Well done, Chris. I like the filibuster requirements myself. But the repugs don't have the numbers here so it's time to call their bluff.
I'm not sure what you mean by requirements, johnnymac, but I certainly do like the filibuster. I hope my post doesn't give the impression that I don't.
Your post leaves it ambiguous as to whether you do or don't like the filibuster. That's why I pointed you off-site to my essay on why the filibuster is sometimes critical. But I agree with you that the filibuster sometimes gets in the way, and I think it's not as much of a deterrent as it often treated as being. I think it's clumsy in some ways but I'm developing an appreciation for the clumsiness as a semi-deterrent to its use.