So we now need 60 votes to confirm cabinet members

[dsc]

This is power grab on order with the power grab that Radical Republicans did against Andrew Johnson. Andrew Johnson was famously the first President Impeach and came within one vote of being convicted. He got Impeached for breaking a law banning him from firing cabinet members without the permission of the Republican Senate. A case could be made that Johnson was a special case. An unelected President who was the opposite of the President whose election he rode to the office. But even then, a GOP Senator realized the precedent being set was untenable in a Democratic Republic.

Requiring 60 votes is nearly as bad. Cabinet members serve at the President's pleasure. That was settled in 1868, when Andrew Johnson wasn't removed from office. If an unelected, borderline treasonous, drunkard of a President gets to decide who is in his cabinet, then any President should. We have won 3 of the last four Senate elections as well as the last two Presidential elections. That is why we have President Obama and 55 Democratic Senators. The notion that a minority, rump group of Senators can prevent a President from having his team is profoundly anti democratic. At the very least, if the GOP wants to thwart Obama from having Hagel or anyone else in his cabinet, they should have to actually win Senate elections. Allowing them to do so despite losing is lots of things, democratic isn't one.

[lonestarnot]

1. I hope Harry Reid is happy with himself.

[Honeycombe8]

2. Yep. The thought crossed my mind. nt

[kestrel91316]

3. What really galls me is that if the situation were EXACTLY

the reverse, the Republicans would be running roughshod all over Dems. Getting rid of the filibuster, passing whatever they damned well pleased, because Dems would be caving on issues HOURLY.

[lonestarnot]

4. Seems we are just fucked no matter win or lose.

[davidn3600]

5. The GOP didnt get rid of the filibuster when they held the senate in 2002-2006.

But the Democrats caved on everything. So it really didnt matter.

[lonestarnot]

6. As I was saying.

[villager]

7. I suppose if we could put "We cave on everything" in Latin, we'd have the Democratic slogan...

...ready to go!

[Arcanetrance]

13. Nos antrum omnia

I think it's been awhile

[kestrel91316]

8. True. But I suspect next time they will get rid of it as insurance.

[Demo_Chris]

9. Big time. They are not playing around. We are. n/t

[SoCalDem]

16. It may be a while before we GET a "next time"

THIS two year time-frame was important, because in 2015, Pres. O may have a republican house AND senate..

and whomever is elected in 2016 have have them as well

The maps are not "good" for us..

I can see us losing 7 from this map...and how many red seats might we pick up?..I see ZERO
2014


This is a "kinder map", but 2016 is a presidential year and who knows how that will go? a republican win could sweep in some unexpected senators too..You KNOW they will pull out all the stops for this final hurrah and an attempt to undo everything Obama managed to accomplish..
2016

[KharmaTrain]

20. History For The 6th Year Of A Presidency...

...bears out what you're showing. The only President in recent memory to buck that trend was Clinton in '98...a backlash from the impeachment fiasco. Who knows, the way the rushpublicans are behaving we may see another backlash in '14 but I'm not banking on that.

People keep screaming that it's Reid's fault about the lack of meaningful filibuster reform but there were at least 9 Sentors who wouldn't support the Merkley plan...many afraid of that 2014 map.

Not that I'm wishing for this...far from it...but I imagine many who want to blame Reid for not using the "nuclear option" will be among the first to scream for him to start filibustering if the tables are turned...

Cheers...

[City Lights]

17. Yup.

[cui bono]

10. Has this happened before for a nomination?

I don't recall. I didn't realize a nomination was subject to the 60 votes to bring it to a vote. That's stupid.

[dsc]

21. There have been two other filibusters but neither were serious

One was of a Reagan Commerce Secretary by Jesse Helms for not being sufficiently anti Communist. It was ended on the first try with over 80 votes. The other was of Dirk Hempthorne for Interior by Nelson of Florida and was ended similarly. This is the first real filibuster of a cabinet nominee ever.

[LeftishBrit]

11. Because I'm not American, I may be not 'getting' something; but what puzzles me here...

is: wasn't Hagel a REPUBLICAN Senator? How much more bipartisan could Obama get than that? Would the Republicans simply refuse to confirm anyone at all that Obama nominated? Or does this possibly reflect some Republican internecine warfare?

[Behind the Aegis]

12. Mean ole Hagel was mean to golden boy, "W". That's about all you need to know.

Oh well, there is also the idea that were he to oversee cuts to the defense, then the Republicans would be seen as "weak on defense" especially if they didn't fight his nomination. However, most prefer gulping down the candy eyes of the red herring being served up (a.k.a. Israel).

[bemildred]

14. It is a mistake to try to interpret public political discourse in this country literally.

It is not intended to inform, but to distract, and what is being distracted from is corruption, deal making, the selling off for profit of the public's business and the public's assets.

[Dragonfli]

15. Down in the first round Harry, Taking a dive is his specialty

He could have been a contender, but he is just a bum.....

re-enactment of Harry's filibuster reform "fight"

[City Lights]

19. I shouldn't be, but I am LOL.

[sadbear]

18. I wonder if high school government class curriculum has changed.

When I was in high school in the early 90's, we were taught that the Senate only needed 50 votes to pass a bill (or confirm a president's nominee.) Oh, and occasionally the VP was needed to break a tie.

What the hell do they teach now?

[emsimon33]

22. Harry Reid needs to go!!!!! What a sell out!!!!! Elizabeth Warren should take his place.

She has balls. Harry Reid sure doesn't.