111th Senate Breaks A Filibuster Record

[kpete]

Source: Talking Points Memo

111th Senate Breaks A Filibuster Record
Brian Beutler | December 23, 2010, 9:24AM


If you're wondering why Dems are all of a sudden smitten with the idea of reforming Senate rules, check out this chart, passed along by a Democratic source.

Over the last two years, Dems broke more filibusters than any Senate in recorded history. In fact the only other Senate that comes close was the last Senate, right after the GOP lost its controlling majority on the Hill.

Perhaps because their majority was so large, Democrats actually had to take fewer steps to break filibusters this Senate than in 2007-2008. In the 111th, Harry Reid filed 136 cloture petitions, down three from the 110th. And according to Senate record keeper, Dems held fewer votes to invoke cloture this Congress than last -- 91 compared to 112.

That may make stories about incoming class of Democrats toying with the idea of modifying some of the Senate's rules more explicable.


Read more: http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2010/12/111th-senate-breaks-one-filibuster-record.php?ref=fpblg

[SpiralHawk]

1. "We want America to fail." - Republicons

"Fail, fail, fail - we are working to drag you all down to our level of FAIL. Sneer. Smirk."

- Republicons for Fail

[nc4bo]

6. +1. nt

[jpak]

2. In solidarity with our GOP Senate majority - I officially filibuster this thread

:D

[The Second Stone]

3. If the caucus is ready it is time to make the filibuster

as extinct as the moderate republican. Back when Collins and Snowe joined with the gang of 14 to convince Democrats to stop blocking Bush appointees, they promised to stop filibusters generally. They and the other gang of 14 members, including McCain, have not stopped the filibuster abuse of Republicans. The filibuster is undemocratic and needs to end. Nuke the damn thing.

[Geoff R. Casavant]

4. I would not be so hasty to change the filibuster

As I recall, the Democrats used it when they were in the minority, and it was useful in blocking John Bolton, for instance. The Dems didn't use it anywhere near to this extent, but it is a helpful tool to prevent the tyranny of a bare majority.

[The Second Stone]

5. No, it was not useful for blocking John Bolton

he got in. The fullofbluster is undemocratic, gets in the way of getting the nation's business done and is not something that the Democrats will actually use to block something. We get assholes like Bolton precisely because the Democrats will not use the filibuster and we don't get the nation's business done. I've watched the filibuster for almost 40 years and on balance it is the single most awful feature of the United States government.

[st8grad93]

7. Bolton was a recess appointment

Because of the success of the Democratic Filibuster against his nomination. Democrats also filibustered Miguel Estrada and a few other Bush judicial appointees.

The filibuster is the only protection against a tyrannical majority. Let's say the rules are changed and filibusters are no more. What happens if Republicans take the House, Senate and Presidency in 2012 and have enough to pass a repeal of the health care law with simple majorities ? You OK with that ?

[On the Road]

8. That is an Amazing Chart