Bernie Sanders is on CNN now with Dana Bash regarding reconciliation as a means to get the

[still_one]

financial relief package passed if republicans refuse to compromise.

Bash is presenting the inconsistency when Bernie was against reconciliation when the republicans did it, but has no problem doing it now should the republicans refuse to compromise.

His rebuttal is that the republicans used reconciliation back then to give tax breaks and other benefits to those who didn't need, while the case now is that with millions unemployed, unable to meet rent or mortgage obligations, feed their families, etc. is an emergency situation that cannot wait, and he has no problem if the republicans wish to criticize him for his inconsistency on reconciliation because the situation is not comparable. We are in crisis. That was not the case when the republicans exercised it.

[Demsrule86]

1. Exellent point by Senator Sanders.

[still_one]

2. I agree. I paraphrased it the best I could

[ananda]

3. He's absolutely right!

Reeps wanted to use it to help their rich donors and cronies.

Dems want to use it to help people who really need it.

[NoMoreRepugs]

4. Democratic principle- the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few.

Opposite the RePutinicans core belief.

[alfredo]

7. Democratic principle- the needs of the many outweigh the WANTS of the few.

[NoMoreRepugs]

9. True.

[mucifer]

5. Might piss off some people at DU truth is Bernie's populist appeal can be

very helpful. There were some weird white guys who in 2016 liked trump and Bernie but not Hillary.

Now is the time to use this to our advantage!

[Ferrets are Cool]

6. +1

[BComplex]

8. It would be really stupid of the democrats to discount Bernie's popularity

with millions and millions of Americans.

[plimsoll]

11. Probably not.

Senator Sanders can be difficult, but that is hardly unusual. Most Readers here probably won’t object to anybody trying to resolve this crisis, but plenty would object to saying this is the only way it can be resolved or that only X politician can do it.

[still_one]

14. Exactly. It seems like some want to create unnecessary arguments between Democrats about

something 99% of us agree on

[OhNo-Really]

18. Wolves (d). Whatever it takes Feed & House ppl NOW or lose 2022

[Bigredhunk]

10. Good for Bernie!

GD she can be annoying. It was only weeks ago that she was still trying to do a praising of drumpf's "tone" thing again.

[still_one]

12. Bash didn't do anything wrong during the interview, and I think Sanders appreciated the question

She brought up the “mitten” craze, and he loved it

[Happy Hoosier]

13. For all my criticisms of Sen Sanders....

... and they are many.... he is the exact voice we need on this issue right now. And it underlines why he belongs in the Senate and not in the cabinet.

[NHvet]

15. You are correct

He best serves all of us being a Senator. He has great ideas and always has been for the common man, but he is too polarizing to the other side to be able to get to the big stage.

[W_HAMILTON]

16. So, is he not for getting rid of the filibuster then?

Did Dana Bash ask him about that?

[still_one]

19. No, but the argument would still apply. This is an emergency situation, and people's lives

are literally at risk. However, because of the 50-50 situation in the Senate, new rules need to be agreed on between McConnell and Schumer before the Democrats can exert their majority agenda. Until that happens the Senate rules are governed by the old rules, which were under republican control.

It is unfortunate that we could not have gained at least one more Senate seat. However, I am thankful that we have at least have what we have.

McConnell is saying he will not agree to any Senate rules unless Schumer says the filibuster will not be taken away. Schumer up to now has indicated he won't budge on that, but in order for the Democrats to control the agenda and move forward, I am not sure what he can do.

I am hoping beyond hope that there might be one republican Senator who goes independent, and caucuses with the Democrats, but that is even more unlikely to happen

At least as far as the stimulus is concerned, we don't need to get rid of the filibuster to make that happen, because we can achieve that through reconciliation, and in either case whether we are talking about getting rid of the filibuster or reconciliation to get the aid package through, the emergency situation we are in justify it

[W_HAMILTON]

21. But we won't be passing a bill through reconciliation until the rules are set anyway.

And it is believed we won't be able to pass everything in Biden's proposed COVID relief bill through reconciliation, so, we will be leaving some items off the table. Sanders has said in the past that he isn't necessarily in favor of getting rid of the filibuster, so if that is still his stance today, I would like to be aware of it so that we Democrats can start lobbying him just like we are Manchin, Sinema, etc.

[still_one]

23. Everything you said is accurate

[marble falls]

17. What Bernie Sanders said, only carve it in stone.

[dsc]

20. I only oppose reconciliation because I don't think there should be a filibuster at all

not have exceptions for things that in the main tend to favor GOP priorities. Yes, in this case we are doing things that favor our priorities so yeah for that, but there are massive things that need done that can't be done in reconciliation.

[grantcart]

22. Agreed

[still_one]

26. If the republicans refuse to work with the Democrats on this rescue package, because of the life and

death issues this involves, I believe justify the use of reconciliation. As you said reconciliation isn’t applicable for most things, but in this pandemic emergency I think it definitely justifies it.

This is not because of a “Democratic” or “Republican” priority, but an American people issue because of the pandemic

The reason I favor abolishing the filibuster is because I think it is not only misused, but because it goes against the idea that an issue with the most votes doesn’t necessarily win

I understand the justification for it is because it gives the minority a voice, but unless it is reformed, it is too easily misused

The reason Reed removed it is because McConnell was misusing it to prevent President Obama from getting anything through

[dsc]

27. The filibuster was never legitimate in my eyes

for anything other than Court appointments and the GOP abuse of it rendered that purpose illigitimate too.

[still_one]

29. I personally agree. The filibuster was used extensively with anti-civil-rights efforts in the

south which allow southern senators to utilize it to block Civil Rights bills

[mountain grammy]

24. One thing about Senator Bernie Sanders..

He's rarely wrong.

[still_one]

25. David Sirota, Briahna Joy Gray, and Nina Turner?

[mountain grammy]

30. 🙄

[still_one]

31. I think it is self-explanatory, and a reflection of judgment

[mvd]

28. I agree with you

Glad to see him in this important position.

[BobTheSubgenius]

32. I don't know the definition of "reconciliation" under consideration, and who is defining it.

Have I missed some major discussions and am without some important information?

[JudyM]

33. Budget reconciliation