Reforming the filibuster rules is important even though

[Shea]

we won't have a majority in the House.

If nothing else, we should make it a lot harder for the Rethugs to filibuster and put holds on nominations of Federal Judges and Supreme Court Justices.

[The Capitol Punisher]

Agreed. I do like having some filibuster in place, but either reducing the number of votes needed or requiring a Mr. Smith style filibuster could be improvements to the system.

[Andy823]

(01-03-2011 09:20 AM)The Capitol Punisher Wrote:  Agreed. I do like having some filibuster in place, but either reducing the number of votes needed or requiring a Mr. Smith style filibuster could be improvements to the system.

I agree, no matter who it is that filibuster, they need to come forward explain "WHY" they want to kill the bill, and then as you said, do it the Mr. Smith way, stay and the floor and keep on talking!

There is no way anyone should be able to stop a bill and nobody knows the name of the person who is trying to stop it, or why!

[jaxx]

This is pretty interesting, about how they can get this done.


Democrats Plan Push to Curtail Use of Filibusters

WASHINGTON — A band of Senate Democrats signaled on Monday that it would press forward when Congress convenes this week with a proposal to curtail filibusters and other methods of slowing the chamber’s work, but a bit of procedural sleight-of-hand could delay any floor fight over the contentious rules changes until later in January.

<..> In essence, Democrats could put the Senate in recess at the conclusion of Wednesday’s mainly ceremonial proceedings to be highlighted by the swearing in of 13 new senators.

As a result, the Senate would technically still be in the same legislative day when lawmakers returned on Jan. 24, and the backers of the rules changes could proceed at that point if they were not satisfied. Mr. Udall could also seek other guarantees that his right to challenge the rules was not harmed by the delay, which he said could give him more time to build support for his plan.

<..> Besides forcing senators to take the floor to defend their filibusters, Democrats also want to make it harder to stonewall the initial effort to bring a measure to the floor, a step known as the “motion to proceed.” They also want to ban the ability of senators to place an anonymous “hold” on a bill or nomination.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/04/us/pol...&emc=tha24

[OregonBlue]

I've read several places that Reid is working out a deal with McConnell so I'm rather skeptical. The RepubliCONS want to be able to introduce their amendments and I feel certain that Reid is gonna cave on that. Why else would he be working with McConnell instead of working with the Dems? I don't think we are going to be happy with their compromise.

I saw my senator Merkley yesterday talking about changing the rules but I fear that once again, Reid is going to ignore his own party and work out some deal with the CONS.