Republicans' Supreme Court gambit may backfire. Here's how.

[yortsed snacilbuper]

if Democrats capture a Senate majority in the November elections, they will have several means of reprisal. Here’s how that might play out.

by pushing through a confirmation vote between now and the next inauguration, McConnell would be violating the rule he articulated just four years ago against considering and confirming a Supreme Court justice during an election year. That may signal to congressional Democrats and their various constituencies that old norms of restraint and bipartisanship have evaporated.

Some Democratic Senate leaders are already calling for hardball should the party retake the Senate and win the presidency. Former Senate majority leader Harry M. Reid (D-Nev.), current Minority Leader Charles E. Schumer (D-N.Y.), and former president Barack Obama have urged consideration of eliminating senators’ ability to filibuster legislative measures.

The Senate filibuster rule requires 60 votes to end debate and vote on most measures, which enables the minority party to prevent the majority from passing legislation. Since Democrats are unlikely to win 60 seats in November, passing hardball measures — or even moderate, conventional legislation — would be hard to do with the filibuster in place. Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden, though known for believing in bipartisan cooperation, recently suggested that given Republicans’ escalating hardball, even he would support abolishing the filibuster. That would enable Democrats to pass a host of other hardball measures.

hardball

[lagomorph777]

1. Hardball: Expand the Federal bench, including SCROTUS.

Let's play.

[Bettie]

11. Make the House of Representatives Larger

So that the EC reflects where humans live in this country.

[lagomorph777]

13. That might be do-able.

Worth considering!

[Bettie]

16. Easier than a constitutional amendment

but, reps would have less power individually. So, they might not want to do that.

Yeah, there would be complaints about office space and stuff, but that isn't a reason to refuse to give US, We The People, appropriate representation!

[lagomorph777]

17. Dems might like it, if it gives a chance to re-draw the districts and reduce Gerrymanders.

[Bettie]

18. It is harder to gerrymander a state if the districts

are smaller.

One of the few good things about Iowa is that the process to draw districts here is pretty neutral.

[paleotn]

2. Hardball? Oh, we're just getting started

We need to ram through stuff that would make even LBJ blush.

[mr_lebowski]

3. Abolishing the Filibuster, given how infrequently Democrats control the Senate lately

seems ... short-sighted. Aren't we right now looking at a 3rd, HORRENDOUS SCOTUS choice being put in place because the loss of the Filibuster for nominees?

Expanding SCOTUS and making DC and PR states, OTOH ...

[mcar]

5. The House has already voted to give statehood to DC

I think that's already baked in the cake. Hopefully, PR will follow.

4 more senators, presumably reliably Democratic, will change the Senate for a long time.

[HariSeldon]

6. Neither of those happen with the filibuster still in play

Republicans will filibuster those measures, no question. Softball is playing using the reconciliation bill to create an environment where Republicans agree to measures they'd otherwise consider anathema; hardball is eliminating their ability to block Democratic priorities with the filibuster.

[mr_lebowski]

8. Okay, well ... if that's the only way to do AND it 100% gets statehood for those 2 places

and allows us to get 11 on SCOTUS iif the Filibuster is abolished, then it MAY make strategic sense. It should not be done lightly though.

[Mariana]

9. They'll abuse the filibuster and make it impossible to govern.

If they're in the minority in the Senate, and they have the filibuster in its current form, they'll block every single piece of legislation from the House. Every single one.

[mr_lebowski]

10. I'm not saying there's no argument for abolishing it ...

I'm saying it should be done with considerable caution, if done.

If it guarantees 4 more Senators and 2 more SCOTUS judges appointed by Biden ... that would definitely warrant consideration.

[Mariana]

20. I don't know if it can guarantee those specific things.

Not abolishing it, on the other hand, pretty much guarantees that the Republicans will block every single piece of legislation that comes from the House. Every single one.

[Bettie]

19. How did the fillibuster being in place help us in the last four or eight years?

If our side won't use it, why have it at all? Just to let Moscow Mitch and Lying Leningrad Lindsay have their way?

[Gore1FL]

21. The GOP has abused the filibuster so much when out-of-power that it is no longer a useful rule.nt

[TlalocW]

4. If nothing else

When democrats take back the Senate, whoever the speaker is, they should say things like, "Well, normally we didn't do things this way, but our good friend, Mr. McConnell, thought it was a good idea..." or, "We know our good friend from the other side of the aisle, Mr. McConnell would do it this way, but we're going to be honorable and do it the right way..." depending on which course of action screws republicans over the most.

TlalocW

[HariSeldon]

7. Perhaps the filibuster could just be limited

Change the Senate rules so that the minority party can only block cloture with a timely (e.g. within 14 days) supportive resolution from the House, or maybe just from the Speaker of the House. If course, the Republican Party is showing it will just do whatever forwards its ends, fairness be damned, so they really don't even deserve that consideration.

[Bettie]

14. Or say it could block cloture for 24 hours

And only one such block per piece of legislation.

That way they get to have their tantrum, but stuff gets done too.

[Demsrule86]

15. No, eliminate it.

[Bettie]

12. After the last twelve years is there ANY doubt that

there are not norms, that there is no low that Republicans won't sink to?

Is there any doubt that had Clinton been allowed to take office Moscow Mitch and his Minions would never have allowed ANY confirmations whatsoever?

Our side needs to do what needs to be one and be willing to overlook the whining and screeching they will do over not being able to stop each and every piece of legislation from getting a vote.

Civility? You can not be civil with these people.

NO negotiating with congressional terrorists.

[maxsolomon]

22. My Aunt may have balls and be my Uncle.

Here's how.

[Wounded Bear]

23. Kill the fillibuster...without that nothing else gets done...nt

[The Mouth]

24. This presumes that we win the Senate back

If we don't, the Republicans can now remove the filibuster and say "You were going to do it", then we're really fucked.