Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Graham still talking about leaving town. Do it, you dickmite. [View all]Celerity
(54,238 posts)32. I disagree with your framing. Manchin's refusal to support every single suggested modification
of the filibuster so far (and using so-called bi-partisanship as a key rationale), and Sinema's desire to require a 60 vote majority for all Senate business is ample evidence of my claim of fetishisation of so-called bi-partisanship.
Joe Manchin: I will not vote to eliminate or weaken the filibuster
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/joe-manchin-filibuster-vote/2021/04/07/cdbd53c6-97da-11eb-a6d0-13d207aadb78_story.html
There is no circumstance in which I will vote to eliminate or weaken the filibuster, Manchin wrote. The time has come to end these political games, and to usher a new era of bipartisanship where we find common ground on the major policy debates facing our nation.
The time has come to end these political games, and to usher a new era of bipartisanship where we find common ground on the major policy debates facing our nation
Sinema:
I want to restore the 60-vote threshold for all elements of the Senates work
https://www.vox.com/22319564/filibuster-reform-manchin-democrats-nuclear-option
The filibuster hurts only Senate Democrats and Mitch McConnell knows that
The numbers don't lie.
https://www.msnbc.com/opinion/filibuster-hurts-only-senate-democrats-mitch-mcconnell-knows-n1255787
snip
Cutting off debate in the Senate so legislation can be voted on is done through a procedure called "cloture," which requires three-fifths of the Senate or 60 votes to pass. I went through the Senate's cloture votes for the last dozen years from the 109th Congress until now, tracking how many of them failed because they didn't hit 60 votes. It's not a perfect method of tracking filibusters, but it's as close as we can get. It's clear that Republicans have been much more willing and able to tangle up the Senate's proceedings than Democrats. More important, the filibuster was almost no impediment to Republican goals in the Senate during the Trump administration. Until 2007, the number of cloture votes taken every year was relatively low, as the Senate's use of unanimous consent agreements skipped the need to round up supporters. While a lot of the cloture motions did fail, it was still rare to jump that hurdle at all and even then, a lot of the motions were still agreed to through unanimous consent. That changed when Democrats took control of Congress in 2007 and McConnell first became minority leader. The number of cloture motions filed doubled compared to the previous year, from 68 to 139.
Things only got more dire as the Obama administration kicked off in 2009, with Democrats in control of the House, the Senate and the White House. Of the 91 cloture votes taken during the first two years of President Barack Obama's first term, 28 or 30 percent failed. All but three failed despite having majority support. The next Congress was much worse after the GOP took control of the House: McConnell's minority blocked 43 percent of all cloture votes taken from passing. Things were looking to be on the same course at the start of Obama's second term. By November 2013, 27 percent of cloture votes had failed even though they had majority support. After months of simmering outrage over blocked nominees grew, Senate Democrats triggered the so-called nuclear option, dropping the number of votes needed for cloture to a majority for most presidential nominees, including Cabinet positions and judgeships. The next year, Republicans took over the Senate with Obama still in office. By pure numbers, the use of the filibuster rules skyrocketed under the Democratic minority: 63 of 123 cloture votes failed, or 51 percent. But there's a catch: Nothing that was being voted on was covered by the new filibuster rules. McConnell had almost entirely stopped bringing Obama's judicial nominees to the floor, including Supreme Court nominee Merrick Garland.
McConnell defended the filibuster on the Senate floor last week, reminding his counterparts of their dependence on it during President Donald Trump's term. "Democrats used it constantly, as they had every right to," he said. "They were happy to insist on a 60-vote threshold for practically every measure or bill I took up." Except, if anything, use of the filibuster plummeted those four years. There are two main reasons: First, and foremost, the amount of in-party squabbling during the Trump years prevented any sort of coordinated legislative push from materializing. Second, there wasn't actually all that much the Republicans wanted that needed to get past the filibuster in its reduced state after the 2013 rule change. McConnell's strategy of withholding federal judgeships from Obama nominees paid off in spades, letting him spend four years stuffing the courts with conservatives. And when Trump's first Supreme Court nominee, Neil Gorsuch, was filibustered, McConnell didn't hesitate to change the rules again. Trump's more controversial nominees also sailed to confirmation without any Democratic votes. Legislatively, there were only two things Republicans really wanted: tax cuts and repeal of Obamacare. The Trump tax cuts they managed through budget reconciliation, a process that allows budget bills to pass through the Senate with just a majority vote.
Republicans tried to do the same for health care in 2017 to avoid the filibuster, failing only during the final vote, when Sen. John McCain's "no" vote denied them a majority. The repeal wouldn't have gone through even if the filibuster had already been in the grave. As a result, the number of successful filibusters plummeted: Over the last four years, an average of 7 percent of all cloture motions failed. In the last Congress, 298 cloture votes were taken, a record. Only 26 failed. Almost all of the votes that passed were on nominees to the federal bench or the executive branch. In fact, if you stripped out the nominations considered in the first two years of Trump's term, the rate of failure would be closer to 15 percent but on only 70 total votes. There just wasn't all that much for Democrats to get in the way of with the filibuster, which is why we didn't hear much complaining from Republicans. Today's Democrats aren't in the same boat. Almost all of the big-ticket items President Joe Biden wants to move forward require both houses of Congress to agree. And given McConnell's previous success in smothering Obama's agenda for political gain, his warnings about the lack of "concern and comity" that Democrats are trying to usher in ring hollow. In actuality, his warnings of "wait until you're in the minority again" shouldn't inspire concern from Democrats. So long as it applies only to legislation, the filibuster is a Republicans-only weapon. There's nothing left, it seems, for the GOP to fear from it aside from its eventual demise.
snip
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):
33 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
Extremely unlikely. But attack them for no reason if it makes you feel better.
tritsofme
Jul 2021
#16
of course they would, they both insist on the fetishisation of so-called bi-partisanship nt
Celerity
Jul 2021
#17
Nice vulgar, crude language. No I am not full of shit , and it's not an attack. It is simply stating
Celerity
Jul 2021
#22
It should be more than obvious that if Senate Democrats were gifted with such a scenario
tritsofme
Jul 2021
#24
I was extremely specific in what I said. If we trued to pass legislation that Manchin and Sinema
Celerity
Jul 2021
#25
That Manchin/Sinema would object to bills they oppose is not particularly deep insight.
tritsofme
Jul 2021
#31
I disagree with your framing. Manchin's refusal to support every single suggested modification
Celerity
Jul 2021
#32
I'm not sure what you're trying to convince me of here? I'm aware Manchin opposes modifying
tritsofme
Jul 2021
#33
No. Any Republicans present, even Collins or Murkowski, will never vote to allow us to pass
Celerity
Jul 2021
#26
It is all hypothetical and unlikely anyway, but for pointing out simple examples where
Celerity
Jul 2021
#28
I will add a positive thing. IF all the Rethugs leave, and IF it's a bill all 50 Dems agree with, it
Celerity
Jul 2021
#30
Its satire, drawing attention to the fact he's leaving and showing that's ok with me
captain queeg
Jul 2021
#21
He's too ineffective or weak to actually convince *every single* Repuke to stay away, so there's
RockRaven
Jul 2021
#5
"Lindsey Graham and the Dickmites" would be a great name for a punk rock group.
yellowcanine
Jul 2021
#19