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

jmg257

(11,996 posts)
28. Whomever set using it as precedent...
Tue Apr 4, 2017, 05:44 PM
Apr 2017
In 1917, a threat to use what is now known as the nuclear option resulted in reform of the Senate's filibuster rules. An opinion written by Vice President Richard Nixon in 1957 concluded that the U.S. Constitution grants the presiding officer the authority to override Senate rules.[1] The option was used to make further rule changes in 1975.[2] In November 2013, Senate Democrats used the nuclear option to eliminate filibusters on executive branch nominations and federal judicial appointments other than those to the Supreme Court.

Before November 2013, Senate rules required a three-fifths vote of the "duly chosen and sworn" members of the Senate – (usually 60 votes) to end debate on a bill, nomination or other proposal; they also require a two-thirds vote ("present and voting" – 67 or more votes) to end debate on a change to the Senate rules. Those rules effectively allowed a minority of the Senate to block a bill or nomination through the technique of the filibuster. This had resulted in a de facto requirement that a nomination have the support of 60 Senators to pass, rather than a majority of 51. A three-fifths vote is still required to end debates on legislation and Supreme Court


Apparently using for the USSC is new.

Recommendations

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

Hint: Turtle McTurtleface! longship Apr 2017 #1
What about the sheep that follow the Turtle? kentuck Apr 2017 #3
McTurtleface is majority leader. The buck stops there. longship Apr 2017 #5
I would agree that it is his decision whether to put the vote to a simple majority... kentuck Apr 2017 #11
It was asked, "Who is responsible?" Not "Who all are responsible?" longship Apr 2017 #14
You see, you take me literally. kentuck Apr 2017 #15
Indeed, my good friend. :-) nt longship Apr 2017 #17
GOP senators only unilaterally vote because of fear of retalitation by their fuhrer and the Kochs Jonny Appleseed Apr 2017 #19
Yes, they are effectively gerry-mandered to keep their seats... kentuck Apr 2017 #20
Exactly, he's the one who has to propose the rule change Warpy Apr 2017 #26
D'ya know what? longship Apr 2017 #29
Bingo! kentuck Apr 2017 #30
Depends on how much they want this twisted excuse for a judge Warpy Apr 2017 #32
My hypothesis is that they might not have the votes to go nuclear. longship Apr 2017 #33
I see one, Susan Collins. Warpy Apr 2017 #34
Ried's outgoing speech said it all. Xolodno Apr 2017 #2
I heard something this morning I could hardly believe! kentuck Apr 2017 #8
Hence, why the filibuster for all intents and purposes...is dead. Xolodno Apr 2017 #21
Amen to that! kentuck Apr 2017 #22
Schumer tweeted something out synergie Apr 2017 #23
Yeap. Xolodno Apr 2017 #24
repubs Angry Dragon Apr 2017 #4
The current filibuster rule only dates back to 1975 when the "talking filibuster" was eliminated. PoliticAverse Apr 2017 #6
Yes, that is the argument. kentuck Apr 2017 #10
The people who vote for Gorsuch Retrograde Apr 2017 #7
The last senate - who refused to even give Garland a hearing. n/t Ms. Toad Apr 2017 #9
Every Republican. dchill Apr 2017 #12
The nuclear option was already done when they blocked Garland's appointment without a hearing. This still_one Apr 2017 #13
I saw a quote by Adam Schiff... kentuck Apr 2017 #18
That is exactly where I got it from kentuck. I couldn't remember who said it, and appreciate still_one Apr 2017 #25
GOP. In the past, if a candidate wasn't going to get sufficient votes they put up a new candidate. Vinca Apr 2017 #16
the GOP violated their oathes of office Thomas Hurt Apr 2017 #27
True Alice11111 Apr 2017 #31
Whomever set using it as precedent... jmg257 Apr 2017 #28
I think it is relevant to note that in 2013... kentuck Apr 2017 #35
Thanks, Kentuck for the info! nt jmg257 Apr 2017 #36
Harry Reid was told this would happen when he got rid of the filibuster former9thward Apr 2017 #37
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Whose fault if the "nucle...»Reply #28