There's nothing like an idea whose time has come. It seems that filibuster reform's time may finally be here. Of course, the GOP is crying Holy Hell about how this puts a nuzzle on the minority.
Mitch McConnell did touch on a key point in his protests yesterday.
"So it’s no surprise that GOP leaders are characterizing the plan as a fatal assault on the Senate minority’s rights."
“If a bare majority can now proceed to any bill it chooses, and once on that bill, the majority leader, all by himself, can shut out all amendments that aren’t to his liking, then those who elected us to advocate for their views will have lost their voice in the legislative process,” McConnell said.
McConnell warned that Reid and fellow Democrats might come to regret the power move in future Congresses.
“How would you feel if two years from now I have your job and my members are saying let’s get rid of the filibuster altogether with 51 votes?” McConnell asked Reid during floor debate.
http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2012/11/dems-defend-filibuster-reform-effort-mcconnell-has-broken-the-social-contract.php?ref=fpnewsfeed
It's no doubt that for this very reason in the past Reid has been reluctant to take this step. No doubt the GOP plays dirty enough as it is when they have the actual majority. Still, how can it be worse than it's been in recent years? Reid now sees this:
"The point I would make is that I’ve said from the outset is that a test of a good proposal is whether or not you could live with serving under it in the minority,” said Sen. Jeff Merkley (D-OR). “That’s why the talking filibuster is the right way to go. McConnell has broken the social contract. His team, under his leadership, uses it constantly and silently, out of public sight. Really the proposal I put forward restores the basic elements that existed in the past, and I’m quite happy to live under that structure as a minority. … [That] has been part of every conversation I’ve had with colleagues. … If we’re in the minority and we’re blocking something, we should be accountable to the public.”
"But Reid, who opposed Merkley’s efforts in 2010, has come around, and conceded that his junior caucus members had it right all along. The only question now is whether Reid can round up 51 votes for establishing a precedent that could be used against his own party in future Congresses."
Reid then really nails McConnell:
“The Republican leader thinks things are going well here. He’s in a distinct minority because things aren’t going well around here,” Reid said. “Lyndon Johnson: one cloture. Reid: 386. That says it all.”
Some of the changes being considered are:
"two ideas have wide support in the Democratic caucus. The first, more cursory change, would make what’s known as the “motion to proceed” non-debatable. That means the minority could no longer block debate on legislation, while holding out for guarantees on amendment votes or legislative changes to the underlying bill."
"The other would recreate a status quo ante, where filibustering senators would be required to hold the floor and draw public attention to their obstruction efforts. “If they want a filibuster, stand and talk about it,” Reid said.
Indeed, if anything, Greg Sargent and Ezra Klein are right. If at the end of this the Senate is still a 60 vote body the reforms don't go far enough.
Steve Kornacki has a great piece at Slate looking at this problem. The filibuster didn't used to be abused, now it is abused egregiously as shown by Reid's tally: LBJ one cloture. Reid 386.
He's somewhat pessimistic about the reforms the Democrats are looking at right now-though he still thinks they're worth doing and might make Repubs reconsider in the future if for no other reason than the Dems might push for more in 2014.
http://www.salon.com/2012/11/27/the_false_hope_of_filibuster_reform/
The one thing that he doesn't mention-or the TPM piece linked above-is loosening the rules for reconciliation. This would mean the Dems could pass budget related bills more easily with just 51 votes.
No comments:
Post a Comment