General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsEven Claire McCaskill says Schumer should exercise the nuclear option now
Last edited Mon Jan 25, 2021, 11:53 PM - Edit history (1)
EDIT: On Rachel Maddow's show it was announced that the Senate will move forward with adopting an organizing resolution. It appears Mitch may have caved, but we should also see what the organizing resolution says.Original post below
-----------------------------------
Claire McCaskill is not my favorite Democrat. However she said something on Nicole's show today that I have been saying for days: Schumer should get Democrats to exercise the nuclear option on the Organizing Resolution:
Claire:
SunSeeker
(53,456 posts)It's plain as day.
BComplex
(8,980 posts)so they can at least get on with committee chairmanships and cleanup issues.
Plus, by a 1 person majority vote, they can change the rules so that any filibuster needs to have a person talking non-stop and BE IN THE ROOM.
That can be a simple rule change. If the republicans want to filibuster, they're going to have to pay the physical price for it.
Fiendish Thingy
(17,982 posts)Before a floor vote on a rule change can happen, a Motion To Proceed must pass, and that is subject to filibuster.
The filibuster, in all shapes and forms must be dead, dead, dead, twelve ways to Sunday, no exceptions, no excuses.
The stakes are too high.
SunSeeker
(53,456 posts)Fiendish Thingy
(17,982 posts)SunSeeker
(53,456 posts)Fiendish Thingy
(17,982 posts)SunSeeker
(53,456 posts)Republicans have made it clear they won't vote for the covid relief package Sinema's and Manchin's constituents desperately need. If Schumer can't convince those two of the need to get rid of the filibuster so we can rescue the American people, maybe some other Dem should be Senate Majority leader.
ancianita
(38,090 posts)What the heck were we all crazy about the GA vote for, if not that? And we could get at least one reasonable Repub to join us, right? Schumer is the majority leader for a reason, so...
What am I missing?
Fiendish Thingy
(17,982 posts)Before Dems won the majority, so Republicans chair committees, not Dems, and can block legislation from moving to the floor.
Rules can be changed with a simple majority vote, however, the Motion To Proceed to a floor vote can be blocked by filibuster.
Schumer could use a parliamentary maneuver to force a floor vote on changing the rule on filibusters so a new organizing resolution could be voted on, but he doesnt have 50 votes, as 2-3 Dem senators opposed changing the filibuster rule, even if just for the organizing resolution.
So, at the moment, Schumer is majority leader in name only, and with the filibuster intact, has very little power to do anything.
ancianita
(38,090 posts)Fiendish Thingy
(17,982 posts)Go nuclear over the Organizing Resolution, which few Americans understand, and it will likely fail.
Go nuclear over the COVID relief bill, which every American understands, and theres a better (but not guaranteed) chance of getting Manchin and Sinema on board.
Manchin and Sinema would both have more power and influence without the filibuster, so I am mystified why they oppose killing it.
ancianita
(38,090 posts)party Repub in that group -- say, Romney. Sell the power gain Sinema would get. Sell McCain on switching parties. Anything.
Looks like it's breaking right now that McCONNELL HAS CAVED.
So I guess our worries are moot??
Bev54
(11,851 posts)not sure they have the votes with Manchin and Sinema. Somebody needs to get in their heads about this, start calling their offices asap.
SunSeeker
(53,456 posts)Time for Schumer to play hardball.
Bev54
(11,851 posts)they likely are attention seekers who need to be coddled.
NCDem47
(2,555 posts)Be specific.
Laelth
(32,017 posts)-Laelth
comradebillyboy
(10,417 posts)I keep seeing called for but I dont know what it is.
BlueSky3
(686 posts)Hermit-The-Prog
(36,378 posts)SharonClark
(10,251 posts)Im always glad to hear her on MSNBC because shes tired of the bullshit and wants to get things done.
Karadeniz
(23,293 posts)Commentaries and explanations, like you.
bottomofthehill
(8,766 posts)Clearly, she was way better than that.
Karadeniz
(23,293 posts)bottomofthehill
(8,766 posts)Manchin, Senima, although we cant totally rely on them, we know how the vote would be if their seat was held by a Republican.
Karadeniz
(23,293 posts)StarfishSaver
(18,486 posts)and refused to support her.
This is the result of mindless purity tests.
bottomofthehill
(8,766 posts)She is clearly too moderate for Massachusetts, but she was as good as we were going to get in MO
StarfishSaver
(18,486 posts)MontanaMama
(23,952 posts)an overpaid bunch of do-nothings thanks to Republicans, McConnell and their criminal obstruction. GET THIS DONE.
Be specific. Thanks.
themaguffin
(4,156 posts)Thekaspervote
(34,363 posts)moonscape
(5,278 posts)majority in order to organize the Senate, not to eliminate the filibuster for which we dont have tthe votes.
bucolic_frolic
(46,512 posts)W_HAMILTON
(8,316 posts)I get the feeling that a lot of her, let's say, Manchin-like antics while she was senator was due to her having to hold back to win in a super-red state. Now that she no longer has that problem, she doesn't really hold back and is actually much further left than I first thought. I remember her, in her role as commentator, telling her former colleagues -- at the time I believe she was directing it towards Republicans to do the right thing in regards to something Trump-related, maybe impeachment -- that losing your seat, ESPECIALLY if it's due to doing the right thing, is not the end-all be-all. There is life after politics, she said.
I hope she gets on the phone with Manchin and any other holdouts from our side that are reluctant to engage in filibuster reform and drive home this point.
Celerity
(46,154 posts)Donnelly, etc.
Sinema is hard to figure out, she could be another McCaskill I think, as she was far more left early on and morphed into a semi-conservative centrist (she voted with Trump as much as Manchin, those two far more than any other Democratic Senator still there), BUT Sinema has by far the highest plus/minus score of any Dem Senator, meaning she voted more with Trump than her State would predict, for example she is almost full 61 points higher than Tester, a plus 10.6 versus a minus 50.3. As for McCaskill, she was a minus 37.2, so Sinema is around 48 points higher than her).
https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/congress-trump-score/
Ignore Lummis, she was only there for a few votes in January 2021, and is a RWNJ in reality
ancianita
(38,090 posts)I don't know why we don't have a 50 vote, or who it is we can't depend on, but this nuclear option is a rule, and so we should use what helps our legislative progress.
from wikipedia (thanks, BlueSky3)
This procedure uses Rule XX to allow the Senate to decide any issue by simple majority vote, regardless of Rule XXII, which requires the consent of 60 senators (out of 100) to end a filibuster for legislation and 67 for amending a Senate rule. The term "nuclear option" is an analogy to nuclear weapons being the most extreme option in warfare.
Let them scream to hell and back.
mcar
(43,366 posts)Be specific.
George II
(67,782 posts)servermsh
(1,373 posts)George II
(67,782 posts)jcgoldie
(11,971 posts)Everybody here including you knows that was what was meant.
Response to servermsh (Original post)
Post removed
Response to servermsh (Original post)
Post removed
lpbk2713
(43,189 posts)He will never change. Do whatever needs to be done and piss on him.
orangecrush
(21,240 posts)Let them feel some of the pain we have felt for the last 4 years.
TimeToGo
(1,376 posts)What do republicans and the media think should happen? What is the right way for democratic senators to deal with McConnell? What's the "good" way?
There isn't - because McC is the bad guy here. He's the same as Trump after the election.
bottomofthehill
(8,766 posts)Iggo
(48,196 posts)Thanks, Manchin. (You too, Sinema.)
Bettie
(16,849 posts)or can't do anything about it, what happens? Do Republicans keep the chairmanships and numbers advantage on committees?
Does Moscow Mitch just get to keep running the whole show because two Democrats can't be bothered to show unity with their party?
What are they offering Manchin and Sinema to obstruct?
Response to servermsh (Original post)
Post removed
grantcart
(53,061 posts)"The practical problem is that Chuck Schumer doesn't have 50 votes to change the rules on filibuster. He doesn't have the 50 votes"
He doesn't have the votes.
mcar
(43,366 posts)These people are driving me mad.
mcar
(43,366 posts)without 50 votes? Be specific.
Eyeball_Kid
(7,561 posts)You will ensure that the Dems WILL BE DEFEATED IN 2022 if the Dems do not eliminate the filibuster. Period. Do not mince words. Put the responsibility directly on their shoulders.
In addition, Schumer must offer a carrot as well as display a stick. He must offer them something in return, such as legislation very favorable to their constituents.
This cannot fail. Schumer wanted to be majority leader. Here we are.
NoMoreRepugs
(10,431 posts)mcar
(43,366 posts)Be specific.
mvd
(65,393 posts)Makes me think being Senator from Missouri held her back to some extent.
kentuck
(112,539 posts)They don't have them.
Mr. Sparkle
(3,078 posts)a nuclear option would put less pressure on those 2 or 3 wobbly Democrats not to end the filibuster.
Celerity
(46,154 posts)as well, at least up until now.
Sinema joins Manchin as being on record as against ending the filibuster
https://www.democraticunderground.com/100215005932
snip
There may, may, be others too (perhaps Angus King, Mark Kelly, Bennett, Warner, Kaine, Tester, Booker, and Gary Peters, who have all said no in the past, although some have at least come around to considering it).
ancianita
(38,090 posts)him on Facebook and got 10 likes right away.
BobTheSubgenius
(11,764 posts)And I thought it was pretty complicated already. Reading through this thread was a great education, in that it clearly showed how many of the arcane rules and procedures I know nothing about.