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 General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Celerity

(43,339 posts)
71. No, it almost always blocks Dems and has little impact on Rethugs
Fri Sep 3, 2021, 05:45 AM
Sep 2021
My own add - Sinema wants a 60 vote threshold on EVERY legislative action!. Not joking.



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
I share your frustration and I am at a loss to understand ... hlthe2b Sep 2021 #1
This message was self-deleted by its author Chin music Sep 2021 #2
Actually we need a massive turnout in 2022, so we don't need Manchin or Sinema to get rid of the JohnSJ Sep 2021 #4
This message was self-deleted by its author Chin music Sep 2021 #6
Chin it is doubtful that mass protests will change their minds, if what has happened hasn't done so JohnSJ Sep 2021 #10
This message was self-deleted by its author Chin music Sep 2021 #13
I see parallels to... 2naSalit Sep 2021 #15
This message was self-deleted by its author Chin music Sep 2021 #17
Agreed. 2naSalit Sep 2021 #19
+1000 smirkymonkey Sep 2021 #28
I think it's time to go Mutually Assured Destruction on Manchin & Sinema Girard442 Sep 2021 #3
And how are you going to make that happen? comradebillyboy Sep 2021 #7
Sinema and Manchin aren't the only Democratic Senators comradebillyboy Sep 2021 #5
This message was self-deleted by its author Chin music Sep 2021 #8
I understand, but I don't think any others are willing to ACTUALLY defy leadership and vote to Atticus Sep 2021 #9
This message was self-deleted by its author Atticus Sep 2021 #11
I was wondering the same thing. BOTH FLORIDA and TEXAS underthematrix Sep 2021 #12
pedal to the metal stillcool Sep 2021 #14
A few notes BlueCheeseAgain Sep 2021 #16
Who are are these illusive others my friend? Chin music Sep 2021 #18
I hope it's okay to say this. I'm ready to bribe BadgerMom Sep 2021 #20
This message was self-deleted by its author Chin music Sep 2021 #23
I think horse trading is a very underrated way of doing legislation. BlueCheeseAgain Sep 2021 #27
I wonder who already paid off those two housecat Sep 2021 #21
So, you're accusing two Democrats of taking bribes? Where's the evidence? NurseJackie Sep 2021 #26
I have heard of it as well. That they were paid off. flying_wahini Sep 2021 #29
Lulz. NurseJackie Sep 2021 #31
I agree. That's right up there with "Many people say---" nt Atticus Sep 2021 #33
It was in an article a couple of weeks ago. amywalk Sep 2021 #55
I'm convinced! 😜😂🤣😜 NurseJackie Sep 2021 #57
It was on CNBC amywalk Sep 2021 #60
Lulz. NurseJackie Sep 2021 #61
Did you read the article? amywalk Sep 2021 #62
Where's the part about taking bribes? NurseJackie Sep 2021 #63
Here amywalk Sep 2021 #69
Post removed Post removed Sep 2021 #72
It's a miracle that Manchin, who votes with us 60% of the time, got elected in the single state pnwmom Sep 2021 #70
Manchin and Sinema are only interested in their jobs. Jon King Sep 2021 #22
She's not getting my vote. I'll leave her position blank before I'd vote for her again. nt in2herbs Sep 2021 #24
Great post! hamsterjill Sep 2021 #25
Thanks. nt Atticus Sep 2021 #34
I also want to win. But, at 76, I've learned that beating each other up soldierant Sep 2021 #41
I honestly don't care how it gets done. hamsterjill Sep 2021 #42
K & R jalan48 Sep 2021 #30
I'm not sure Corgigal Sep 2021 #32
It's a shame some of the rules are very restrictive to open discussion SunImp Sep 2021 #67
I understand and share your frustration Mad_Machine76 Sep 2021 #35
And I understand what you are saying, I just disagree. We have to contend with that 6-3 SCOTUS Atticus Sep 2021 #37
I don't know if I would say that we "played nice" and ALLOWED a stolen seat Mad_Machine76 Sep 2021 #39
Which options were "legal" are often determined by the winners. IMHO, we allowed an unprecedented Atticus Sep 2021 #45
Uh. Ok. Mad_Machine76 Sep 2021 #51
If your "we" included the Republican Party, you are sadly mistaken, IMHO. nt Atticus Sep 2021 #58
All the Federal courts have multiple vacancies, soldierant Sep 2021 #44
Republicans don't care about widespread support. BadgerMom Sep 2021 #68
If you've crossed a line, it's one that a great number of us Harker Sep 2021 #36
The other party "negotiates" in bad faith as usual n/t hibbing Sep 2021 #38
You're under the impression ymetca Sep 2021 #40
I'm sure you can cite sources to support such serious accusations. Please share them with us. nt Atticus Sep 2021 #46
K&R a millilon times Wild blueberry Sep 2021 #43
Republicans have no qualm shoving outrageous Firestorm49 Sep 2021 #47
Well said! hamsterjill Sep 2021 #52
Perhaps Biden can offer Manchin a cushy job like a prestigious ambassadorship after 2023 Lonestarblue Sep 2021 #48
And if we end back up as the minority party in the Senate The Mouth Sep 2021 #49
Please ---that amounts to saving the filibuster that MIGHT help us some time in the future Atticus Sep 2021 #50
Not going to happen The Mouth Sep 2021 #53
No, it almost always blocks Dems and has little impact on Rethugs Celerity Sep 2021 #71
Because Manchin is receiving a lot of dark money from amywalk Sep 2021 #54
because we are a big tent qazplm135 Sep 2021 #56
Getting "more Dems into office" is being made more difficult each day as Republicans rewrite Atticus Sep 2021 #59
It is hyperbolic qazplm135 Sep 2021 #64
Since that post makes absolutely no sense to me and is steeped in negativity, Atticus Sep 2021 #65
How does it make no sense? qazplm135 Sep 2021 #66
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»I'm not sure if this will...»Reply #71