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

Celerity

(54,631 posts)
20. The Rethugs will not axe it, especially when a Dem POTUS is still in control.
Fri Dec 31, 2021, 12:58 AM
Dec 2021

The filibuster almost always blocks us,and rarely hurts the Rethugs. The judicial and executive nominee carve-outs were the main things they benefited from.

The filibuster hurts only Senate Democrats -- and Mitch McConnell knows that. The numbers don't lie.

My own add - Sinema wants a 60 vote threshold on EVERY legislative action!. Not joking.



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

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

Yes, it was brutal. elleng Dec 2021 #1
Democrats are sleep walking into electoral disaster montanacowboy Dec 2021 #2
David Plouffe is a very smart person, gab13by13 Dec 2021 #4
yes, I take him very seriously. nt Grasswire2 Dec 2021 #9
He may be smart but he is dead wrong. Jon King Dec 2021 #25
However, the other side has the guns. Grumpy Old Guy Dec 2021 #29
If you had good skills, then muscle and eye memory... Dan Dec 2021 #33
Or just use a shotgun. Grumpy Old Guy Dec 2021 #34
Oh, good. Let's let it get to that then. Scrivener7 Dec 2021 #57
I disagree Dave says Dec 2021 #65
This message was self-deleted by its author Chin music Dec 2021 #27
How does Schumer pass anything without Manchin and Sinema? honest.abe Dec 2021 #3
About 6 months ago, were I Chuck Schumer, gab13by13 Dec 2021 #5
+1 n/t Slammer Dec 2021 #12
What does "I expect your vote" do for you when you get a "no"? Steven Maurer Dec 2021 #26
Senators have always been pushed like that. Some know how to do it and some don't. Scrivener7 Dec 2021 #59
IN a 50+1 to 50 Senate, there is no leverage... Steven Maurer Dec 2021 #66
This. Chuck is a gentleman and my Senator and I will always vote for him, Scrivener7 Dec 2021 #58
Schumer has already said those will be brought to vote when they return after th 1st. Budi Dec 2021 #6
Barron? oasis Dec 2021 #7
Don't shoot the messenger, gab13by13 Dec 2021 #10
They don't need anyone competent not fooled Dec 2021 #15
That kid, from what I've seen in videos and read, is just like his dad. Yes, Barron. ancianita Dec 2021 #17
he has pushed. Manchin and Sinema would rather have the filibuster. Takket Dec 2021 #8
Hopefully we can hang on to the Senate in 2023, gab13by13 Dec 2021 #11
Lamb needs to win that race, even if Fetterman must step aside. Frasier Balzov Dec 2021 #30
That's pretty far-fetched, Deminpenn Dec 2021 #52
Me too SallyHemmings Dec 2021 #49
The Rethugs will not axe it, especially when a Dem POTUS is still in control. Celerity Dec 2021 #20
The filibuster gives them cover to not pass anything TheFarseer Dec 2021 #53
Maybe the media will start to pick up on what was said tonight ...... turbinetree Dec 2021 #13
Democrats have a 50 50 Senate and no hope of ending the filibuster. A llittle reality is needed Demsrule86 Dec 2021 #45
+1 betsuni Dec 2021 #46
I am going ask you what you think of this story...and then tell me who tells the truth more... turbinetree Dec 2021 #64
Maybe I'm just too old and spoled, gab13by13 Dec 2021 #14
I don't know where you live but the townspeople should be Boomerproud Dec 2021 #16
This message was self-deleted by its author Chin music Dec 2021 #28
So, we the people, will just accept the rule of Trump? Dan Dec 2021 #18
+1 orangecrush Dec 2021 #23
It wouldn't be the first time. That is exactly what happened in 2016. Scrivener7 Dec 2021 #60
Alright, maybe I'm a little dumb, but.... SergeStorms Dec 2021 #19
It's an election year. Frasier Balzov Dec 2021 #31
I understand that.... SergeStorms Dec 2021 #36
I don't understand it either. betsuni Dec 2021 #37
The primaries are also susceptible to manipulation. Frasier Balzov Dec 2021 #38
That my last straw with Chris,,,,,,,,, Cryptoad Dec 2021 #21
'Trump Brit Lackis' Celerity Dec 2021 #42
Dear God samplegirl Dec 2021 #22
Utter nonsense because has 0% chance of happening. Jon King Dec 2021 #24
The country limps along as a charade masquerading as the peaceful transfer of power. Frasier Balzov Dec 2021 #32
What? betsuni Dec 2021 #40
Like J6 had zero chance if happening? ria uponit7771 Dec 2021 #41
Do you understand why people might like to avoid that eventuality? Scrivener7 Dec 2021 #61
The breaking glacier to me was the most frightening yet Raine Dec 2021 #35
no MFM008 Dec 2021 #39
It's been relatively easy to see this coming for a while now. GoodRaisin Dec 2021 #43
And I should add that blaming "Democrats" or "Biden" for "not having a sense of urgency" GoodRaisin Dec 2021 #63
This is why I despise Chris Hayes...blaming Biden once more. We have a 50 50 Demsrule86 Dec 2021 #44
+1 betsuni Dec 2021 #47
Thank you Betsuni Demsrule86 Dec 2021 #48
Thank YOU! betsuni Dec 2021 #50
Please understand that MSNBC uses maximum fear-mongering Deminpenn Dec 2021 #51
It's exactly what I've been saying all year. For some reason the urgency doesn't seem to be getting Vinca Dec 2021 #54
It isn't just Washington Democrats who don't get this sense of urgency. Efilroft Sul Dec 2021 #62
I'm not sure about a Trump monarchy TheFarseer Dec 2021 #55
I never dreamed it would get this bad in my country. Paladin Dec 2021 #56
I think David Plouffe's comments have been misconstrued. ShazzieB Dec 2021 #67
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Chris Hayes had a brutal ...»Reply #20