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
Democratic Primaries
In reply to the discussion: Ending the filibuster is critical. And only Liz Warren supports ending it. [View all]EndGOPPropaganda
(1,117 posts)10. Read this. The filibuster helps only Republicans at this time.
From the article
Democrats have no answer to this history. Or rather, what the Democratic frontrunners who have placed the filibuster above all other concerns are telling us is, Too bad. There will be no remedy for any of it.
Some progressives believe that the key to quieting, or at least overpowering, the revanchist tempers of the far right is by building cross-cutting economic institutions to create class solidarity among working people. Give everyone medical security, mobilize the population with the allure of good jobs and a clean environment, and authoritarian appeals to race hatred will lose their popular force. If that assumption is correct, then perhaps it follows that Democratic presidential candidates are reluctant to put the cart of process before the horse of policy. They could feasibly exploit existing Senate rulesjust as Republicans did to cut corporate taxesto increase taxes on the wealthy, expand public health insurance, and spend money on jobs programs, while leaving the filibuster it in place to foil the next Republican administration.
This is foolhardy thinking for many reasons, but most importantly for what it places off limits as means of making people who have suffered for the past two decades whole. Trying to revive the social contract with a budget bill will prove inadequate to the economic policies theyre running on but it will also leave every other agenda item, including basic democratic fairness, on the cutting room floor.
Setting aside the theft of the Supreme Court, there will be no restoration or enhancement of voting rightsMcConnell calls any idea that makes it easier for people to vote a Democratic power grab. There will be no anti-corruption act, no immigration act, no criminal-justice reform act and there will be no truth and reconciliation commission aimed at preventing another authoritarian from coming to power in the U.S. There will be no direct accountability for Trumps enablers in Congress, no penalty for conservative foes of democracy, and no reprieve for the young voters who will have to live for decades under the illegitimate laws and judges Trump will leave behind.
In so many words, these Democrats are saying that come 2021, should voters sweep Trump out of power, it will be time, once again, to turn the page. Obama succumbed to the same temptation in 2009, creating an accountability void for an administration that had illegally spied on Americans and established a global network of secret torture prisons.
Democrats have no answer to this history. Or rather, what the Democratic frontrunners who have placed the filibuster above all other concerns are telling us is, Too bad. There will be no remedy for any of it.
Some progressives believe that the key to quieting, or at least overpowering, the revanchist tempers of the far right is by building cross-cutting economic institutions to create class solidarity among working people. Give everyone medical security, mobilize the population with the allure of good jobs and a clean environment, and authoritarian appeals to race hatred will lose their popular force. If that assumption is correct, then perhaps it follows that Democratic presidential candidates are reluctant to put the cart of process before the horse of policy. They could feasibly exploit existing Senate rulesjust as Republicans did to cut corporate taxesto increase taxes on the wealthy, expand public health insurance, and spend money on jobs programs, while leaving the filibuster it in place to foil the next Republican administration.
This is foolhardy thinking for many reasons, but most importantly for what it places off limits as means of making people who have suffered for the past two decades whole. Trying to revive the social contract with a budget bill will prove inadequate to the economic policies theyre running on but it will also leave every other agenda item, including basic democratic fairness, on the cutting room floor.
Setting aside the theft of the Supreme Court, there will be no restoration or enhancement of voting rightsMcConnell calls any idea that makes it easier for people to vote a Democratic power grab. There will be no anti-corruption act, no immigration act, no criminal-justice reform act and there will be no truth and reconciliation commission aimed at preventing another authoritarian from coming to power in the U.S. There will be no direct accountability for Trumps enablers in Congress, no penalty for conservative foes of democracy, and no reprieve for the young voters who will have to live for decades under the illegitimate laws and judges Trump will leave behind.
In so many words, these Democrats are saying that come 2021, should voters sweep Trump out of power, it will be time, once again, to turn the page. Obama succumbed to the same temptation in 2009, creating an accountability void for an administration that had illegally spied on Americans and established a global network of secret torture prisons.
primary today, I would vote for: Undecided
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):
46 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
Ending the filibuster is critical. And only Liz Warren supports ending it. [View all]
EndGOPPropaganda
Feb 2019
OP
loss of the judicial filibuster is why R's are stacking all the courts right now and for decades...
hlthe2b
Feb 2019
#1
Exactly how, with R's holding Senate & refusing Garland a hearing or vote, might we have prevailed?
hlthe2b
Feb 2019
#6
Gerrymandering for the House, Voter Suppression for Senate. Perhaps you might want to google that...
hlthe2b
Feb 2019
#18
Oh, honey, you STILL haven't answered why exactly Merrick Garland would have been confirmed
hlthe2b
Feb 2019
#25
That is NOT what I asked. I asked you to address YOUR claim that we could have gotten Garland
hlthe2b
Feb 2019
#16
Really, read the article. Keeping the filibuster means submitting to minority GOP rule
EndGOPPropaganda
Feb 2019
#34
I have a degree in political science. I think I know what a filibuster means.
CrossingTheRubicon
Feb 2019
#35
You certainly seem sure of yourself, but I'm not buying what you are selling.
CrossingTheRubicon
Feb 2019
#40
Republicans want the filibuster: they know. Please read these articles.
EndGOPPropaganda
Feb 2019
#43
Nope. The filibuster is why the ACA has been unpopular and therefore vulnerable.
shanny
Feb 2019
#31