Harry Reid Set to Go Nuclear on Executive Nominees

       He's promised he was going here if necessary.
 
       http://diaryofarepublicanhater.blogspot.com/2013/07/in-julys-senate-some-fireworks-over.html

        Now, he's ready to do what is necessary. Re id is set starting on Thursday to begin discussions t alter the Senate rules for the way executive nominees are confirmed by a simple 51 vote majority. This would be an unprecedented move as usually it takes 67 votes to change Senate rules.

       "The result would be a quicker confirmation process for controversial presidential nominees, but infuriated Republicans could look to retaliate in other ways, such as derailing Senate business or further weakening filibuster rules if they return to the majority after the 2014 midterms."

       "Reid appears to have enough support within the Democratic Caucus to go forward with the proposal, several Democratic senators and aides said. Reid will use a senators-only meeting on Thursday to lay out his plans."

      “I’m going to have a caucus on this Thursday and I think … by the time the day’s out you’ll have a better idea on what we’re going to do on this,” the Nevada Democrat told reporters on Tuesday afternoon.

     http://www.politico.com/story/2013/07/harry-reid-executive-branch-nominations-93907.html?hp=t3_3
      Yes, we have to worry about infuriated Republicans. I mean we have to protect the status quo where they're so reasonable and gentle. Listen to them now threaten everything under the sun if the Dems should take this necessary step:

      "But what makes the move unprecedented is Reid’s likely decision to change the rules by 51 votes in a complicated process called the nuclear option. Typically, Senate rules are rarely changed because 67 votes are required to modify them, meaning the minority side can usually thwart any attempt by the majority to ram through rules’ revisions."

       "However, there are several parliamentary tactics that Reid can employ to circumvent the 67-vote requirement. By going the nuclear route, Republicans are warning that Reid would set a damaging precedent that would come back to haunt Democrats should the GOP take back the Senate majority. They could seek to further weaken filibuster rules by a straight majority vote, effectively helping them to advance a conservative agenda, including the repeal of Obamacare."

     “I don’t think it’s going to happen because then when Republicans get into the majority, we will be able to pass legislation and nominees with 51 votes,” said Texas Sen. John Cornyn, the No. 2 Republican. “So I think it’s very shortsighted and would be fundamentally damaging to the Senate as an institution, which encourages deliberation and debate rather than just jamming stuff through on a partisan basis.”

      “He better think about what he’s doing very carefully,” Cornyn warned.

       So Cornyn and company see ending the filibuster for executive nominees as offering them justification for ending the filibuster outright. Let them do it. They have to win back the Senate first, something they've failed to do for 8 straight years-I wonder why that might be. At this point I think you just have to say no guts no glory. 

      They are saying basically that if the Democrats fight back even slightly they're going to exponentially increase they're dysfunctional behavior. You know what? Maybe we're better off without the filibuster. It's basically a relic of the Old Slave South anyway. So much of the Senate's 'august traditions' are about nothing but enabling the minority to rule at the expense of the majority. Even if the GOP did end Obamacare next term, so what? Obama will still be President so it would stay the law of the land. By 2016, everyone would already be unwilling to give up the benefits of Obamacare and that window would be closed. 

      The saying goes, if it ain't broke don't fix it. That's clearly not the case here. Dems must not allow more GOP threats to intimidate them. They've already brought this country to a stand still. A threat to make things even worse if Reid goes nuclear is not very persuasive. 

       I'm happy to hear that deep pocketed Democratic donors to go big here, to go nuclear. Even better, Senate Democrats seem to get it: how can it get any worse, it's already worse than anything. We've had a record number of filibusters since 2009. The GOP plans to find a way to do worse than this? Are we to allow these terrorists to terrorize us?

      "Republicans have a variety of potential options in responding to Reid’s move. They can object to committee meetings and slow action on that front, or try to tie up progress on all legislation, including must-pass appropriations and debt ceiling bills. Democrats counter that this is what’s routinely happening in the Senate now, so why not take the gamble on forcing through a hugely controversial rules change."

      I mean using the debt ceiling as a threat? Isn't that already the status quo?