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
Showing Original Post only (View all)SEN HARKIN: Filibuster Deal ENSURES That Obama's Priorities "WILL NOT GET VERY FAR" [View all]

Time for Harry to be shown the door!!
Iowa Sen. Tom Harkin has been backing filibuster reform packages for most of his Senate career. A group of reporters stopped him today on his way into the caucus meeting where the party will be told the virtues of what Harry Reid and Mitch McConnell agreed on. Harkin fluttered open his binder, pulled out the new rules, and read them slowly, grimly. "They're baby, baby steps," he said. He'd wanted the Democrats to go ahead and change the Senate rules with 51 votes, and Reid had forestalled that.
"It's interesting," said Harkin, "that in 2005 -- I have the paper the Republican Policy Committee put out, you should read it -- where they state that using the constitutional option, this not-nuclear option, has been done before. That was the Republicans' position in 2005, right?" He shook his head. "It depends on who's in the majority. That's all it depends on."
Harkin's been telling progressive radio and TV hosts a story about his pre-election advice to the president. He repeated it outside this meeting. "I said to him," said Harkin, "the night before the election: Look, you get re-elected, if we don't do something significant on filibuster reform, you might as well take a four-year vacation."
Bloomberg's Jim Rowley asked the obvious follow-up: Should Obama go on vacation?
"He can go out and give wonderful speeches, things like that," said Harkin. "But with the House in the hands it's in, and the fact that the Senate, now, you have to have 60 votes to pass anything... well, I daresay that Obama's package, his very aggressive proposals, will not get very far. They'll be so watered down that they won't be recognizable."
"He can go out and give wonderful speeches, things like that," said Harkin. "But with the House in the hands it's in, and the fact that the Senate, now, you have to have 60 votes to pass anything... well, I daresay that Obama's package, his very aggressive proposals, will not get very far. They'll be so watered down that they won't be recognizable."
http://www.slate.com/blogs/weigel/2013/01/24/harkin_filibuster_deal_ensures_that_obama_s_priorities_will_not_get_very.html
And also this....
Final Filibuster Reform Deal Largely Based on John McCain and Carl Levin's Proposals
"...We now have a comprehensive look at the filibuster reform package accepted by Mitch McConnell and Harry Reid. It'll be schlepped to Democrats at an early afternoon meeting. And yes, it functionally ends the campaign for the "talking filibuster," and for putting the burden of filibusters on the minority to get 41 no votes, instead of on the majority to get 60 ayes.
"It looks a lot like McCain-Levin," says a Democratic aide.
And it does. Late last year, as the Merkley-Udall campaign gathered steam, John McCain teamed up with Carl Levin, one of the Democrats' Senate statesman, who was reluctant to support a 51-vote "nuclear option" and get 100 percent of what reformers wanted....."
http://www.slate.com/blogs/weigel/2013/01/24/final_filibuster_reform_deal_largely_based_on_john_mccain_and_carl_levin.html
15 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
SEN HARKIN: Filibuster Deal ENSURES That Obama's Priorities "WILL NOT GET VERY FAR" [View all]
Segami
Jan 2013
OP
Anything The Senate passes will not get passed in The House. All the outrage is over-the-top.
Tx4obama
Jan 2013
#1
No, the republicans will NOT be able to hold up the nominations like in the past.
Tx4obama
Jan 2013
#4
yes there are but there are still enough appellate judges to make that 30 hours a problem
dsc
Jan 2013
#13