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

librechik

(30,957 posts)

22. more likely: TheSenate can lower the # of votes needed to overcome the fillifucker

Reply to jpak (Original post)

Wed Nov 7, 2012, 11:21 AM

Nov 2012

It's only been at 60 for 20 years or so (total guess) back when LBJ was around the number was 54 or thereabouts. It has been changed more than once.

That would curb the power of the minority to kill legislation without totally eliminating the fillibuster

we have more Dems now let's do it!

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

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

23 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

First order of business - suspend the Filibuster [View all] jpak Nov 2012 OP

Day one DUgosh Nov 2012 #1

^^ This. Even if the Republicans make cooperative noises, don't trust them. n/t gkhouston Nov 2012 #2

Number 2: make it so we can easily vote. Everywhere. Register. Vote. Be counted. nt morningglory Nov 2012 #3

Things must be done to protect voter access to federal elections. HereSince1628 Nov 2012 #6

A Freakin Men! LeftofObama Nov 2012 #4

Yup! jpak Nov 2012 #5

100% agree! nt Bonobo Nov 2012 #7

ABSOLUTELY, FIRST ORDER OF BUSINESS. leveymg Nov 2012 #8

Too bad we did not get the House... SnoopDog Nov 2012 #9

We go to the people to put pressure on them rock Nov 2012 #10

I really think that is the only option left... SnoopDog Nov 2012 #16

Even more reason to suspend the Filibuster jpak Nov 2012 #11

You still have to have the House vote Yes for a bill... SnoopDog Nov 2012 #17

I'm not a parliamentarian, but I believe changes to rules in the Senate coalition_unwilling Nov 2012 #12

They can do this before the next session - right? jpak Nov 2012 #13

There are not enough votes in the Senate to pass a rule change like coalition_unwilling Nov 2012 #14

Reid can do it if he wants to - and he wants to now... jpak Nov 2012 #15

See post #19 downthread - n/t coalition_unwilling Nov 2012 #20

It takes only a simple majority to change Senate rules... SnoopDog Nov 2012 #18

Actually, I guess it depends upon whom you consult. ThinkProgress says it takes coalition_unwilling Nov 2012 #19

The Constitution states... SnoopDog Nov 2012 #21

That's how I've always heard it rock Nov 2012 #23

more likely: TheSenate can lower the # of votes needed to overcome the fillifucker librechik Nov 2012 #22