Obama Calls For Nixing The Filibuster If It's Blocking Measures To Expand Voting Rights

[demmiblue]

Source: TPM

As former President Obama made a passionate case for honoring the legacy of the late Rep. John Lewis (D-GA) by expanding voting rights, he said that the Senate filibuster should be eliminated if it stands in the way of measures that protect the right to vote.

"If all of this takes eliminating the filibuster, another Jim Crow relic, in order to secure the God-given rights of every American, then that's what we should do," Obama said.

Obama has called for filibuster reform in the past. But the debate over whether to outright get rid of the tool -- which allows 41 senators to block passage of legislation favored by a majority -- has gain prominence in Democratic circles, as they contemplate a world where they win the White House and both chambers in 2020, but Senate Republicans stymie all aspects of their legislative agenda.

Read more: https://talkingpointsmemo.com/news/obama-filibuster-john-lewis

---

Link to tweet

Link to tweet

[bucolic_frolic]

1. I was always totally for the filibuster, because the rights of the minority would be heard, but

has it done anything for us these 3.5 years? Did it stop McConnell's silent power grab? Has it blocked a Trump nominee?

[cstanleytech]

6. Nope and the Republicans will simply abuse it once Biden is office to prevent him from enacting

anything that will actually help the American people as the only ones they want to help at all are themselves, corporations and their wealthy donors.

[bucolic_frolic]

11. Exactly, so you gotta do what you gotta do

They did.

[lagomorph777]

12. Since the 1960s, it has ensured that ONLY the minority is heard, most of the time.

Time to kill it. Then work on killing the electoral college, and eventually dealing with the major structural flaws in the Constitution. Probably starting around 2050.

[totodeinhere]

2. I understand President Obama's reasoning. But...

I am always hesitant to change the filibuster rules because I worry about what Republicans would do when they control the Senate. In the past Democrats have used the filibuster to block some pretty bad measures that the Republicans tried to pass when they were in the majority.

[Laelth]

3. Agreed.

If the Republicans are so fond of the filibuster, they will be welcome to reinstate it when they next control the Senate. Will they? No, of course not, and that merely proves that the filibuster has outlived its usefulness.

-Laelth

[ancianita]

5. +1 Because Obama is right.

[Roc2020]

4. Yeah that was an eyebrow raising moment

but at this point it's going to go. thing is what's the point of the Senate w/out the filibuster? might as well go to a parliamentary type of government.

[lagomorph777]

13. I wouldn't miss the Senate at all.

If we have two chambers, both should be apportioned by population. Perhaps still a large chamber and a small chamber.

[cstanleytech]

7. One thing I would do if possible if the filibuster is removed is enlarge SCOTUS to atleast 13 if not

more such as 27 and pack it with young progressive judges.

[lagomorph777]

14. Yes please!

[ancianita]

16. I'm all for enlarging the SCOTUS.

[greblach]

8. Repubs removed the filibuster for Supreme Court nominees...

Without Repubs removing the filibuster, Brett Kavanaugh would never have been appointed...

[lagomorph777]

15. And they showed us the path to expanding SCROTUS and neutering Mitch's theft.

[honest.abe]

9. Yes!!!

That is exactly what needs to be done. We now have a very big voice pushing it.

[LiberalLovinLug]

10. If Democrats overcome the suppression and cheating and actually win all branches...

They should immediately, and unilaterally if they have to, pass all of these measures. It will take a few years just to implement them in time for the next election.

[cstanleytech]

17. Yup and if they strike while the iron is hot they could potentially neuter the Republicans badly

enough that once they regain the majority that any attempt at changes by them would be almost impossible.
Especially if one of those changes is massive reform on things like campaign donations and super PACs.

[LiberalLovinLug]

18. I'd also add more to that list

Something Obama decried while in office, the SCOTUS decision to allow secret dark money to fund superpacs with Citizens United. Write new legislation that will force the court to reverse that.

Another thing related to that, is election finance reform.

And a revamp of the electoral college if not eliminating it. Along with dismantling gerry-mandering, update the formula for State representation and base it more on population than area.

And a new fairness doctrine. Some legislation that pushes back against conservative monopolization of daytime talk radio especially in the middle of the country. Or simply create a fact check requirement, and if a station, or network defies that too many times, they get their licence pulled. Whether it is left or right.

Write legislation that legally requires any new Presidential candidate to have to release their tax returns before they are eligible. ( I have this fear that if Trump is voted out, he will go on the offensive on Twitter etc, keep his cult following, and run again in 2024, as he is allowed to.)

[cstanleytech]

20. Yes that is a huge list but its things they need to do otherwise the country is at grave risk if

someone like Trump should ever get into office again.

[sanatanadharma]

19. Return to the talking filibuster

The original intent of the filibuster was to keep the dialog, talk, consideration, rhetoric going; voting thus being delayed or denied due to 'considered attempt to persuade my esteemed colleagues'.

Keep the filibuster, change the rules to require constant, spoken holding of the floor.

This protects the minority right to be considered while also removing the current ease of the 41 to usurp the majority.

[raging moderate]

21. YES! You are right!

That nasty little subterfuge which is currently misnamed a "filibuster" actually bears no resemblance to the genuine filibuster as practiced for most of our national history. There was something heroic about it, and yes, it did encourage continuing discussion of the subject at hand. You can see it depicted in the movie "Mr. Smith Goes to Washington," with James Stewart in the title role.