The Senate made some changes to its plan for filibuster reform, but all in all they were quite underwhelming. Now, the majority party won't need 60 votes to kickstart debate on a bill, but they will have to allow the opposition to slide two amendments into the legislation. Filibustering actual legislation remains intact.
Timothy Noah at The New Republic notes, "There are also a few other chickenshit changes."
Why the change of heart, Senate? Harry Reid says, “I’m not personally, at this stage, ready to get rid of the 60-vote threshold."
What does the change mean? Well, the filibuster isn't dead, and future senators can still ream big about copying Howard Stackhouse or Jefferson Smith'sfictional filibuster prowess ...
... or Huey Long's Senate floor cooking-show filibuster, or Bernie Sanders book-spawning one. But in the end, not much has changed at all. Talking won't be a requirement for those seeking to filibuster a bill, and the filibuster of middle school history class will remain a rarity.
As The Washington Post's Ezra Klein sums up, "The Senate’s reformers are crestfallen. This is not, in their view, filibuster reform. Forget breaking the Senate’s 60-vote requirement."
Senator Tom Harkin, who favored forcing a talking filibuster, said today's move equaled "baby, baby steps."
Ed Kilgore writes," I doubt any reforms will matter a lot until and unless a Senate majority takes the bull by the horns and reduces the cloture threshold below the current 60 votes via the 'constitutional option.' If that is indeed, as its critics call it, the “nuclear option,” today’s deal is very conventional."
In short, "so much for any hope that this Senate might be significantly different from the last one."
Please Contact Senator Reid and tell him he is full of shit CLICK HERE
No comments:
Post a Comment
Thanks For Your Comments