General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsDonald Trump calls for end of 60-vote Filibuster
@realDonaldTrump:
The U.S. Senate should switch to 51 votes, immediately, and get Healthcare and TAX CUTS approved, fast and easy. Dems would do it, no doubt!
LOL Lib
(1,462 posts)dchill
(38,502 posts)LOL Lib
(1,462 posts)Foamfollower
(1,097 posts)Dems could have changed the filibuser rule while McTurtle was busy blocking everything, but they didn't.
Not to mention the fact that the ACA passed with 60 votes in the Senate.
leftstreet
(36,108 posts)Stupid fuckstick
underpants
(182,826 posts)On RW radio I heard during the Gorsuch thing that the filibuster is a creation of the nuclear age. Yes their listeners are lead to believe it has no real history.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Filibuster
dsc
(52,162 posts)The filibuster used to be unbreakable, then it required 67 votes, and now it is down to 60. The 60 vote threshold was adopted in 1975.
Bleacher Creature
(11,257 posts)So good luck with that.
Proud Liberal Dem
(24,414 posts)is now reduced to only being able to promise a vote sometime, but not passage. And whatever they pass would have to travel back through the House again for final passage I believe as well.
unblock
(52,253 posts)if i understand the procedures, republicans are in a bind.
they obviously can't reach 60 votes without democratic cooperation, which is (perhaps surprisingly given our lack of unity in the past) a major challenge.
under current rules, they can pass things with a simple majority only, by using the "reconciliation" rules, but in order to do that, if i understand correctly, it has to be scored by the cbo as not adding to the deficit.
that means they can't just pass a tax cut without offsetting revenue-raising measures, which they're having a tough time agreeing on. it also means they can't just repeal the aca, because that really is a tax cut as well (for the rich, anyway).
so the easiest political solution for them would seem to be to just pass the tax cuts and let it increase the deficit. some of the deficit hawks certainly wouldn't be happy, but they're not likely to turn down a tax cut for the rich over it at the end of the day. they're republicans, after all, and they can be bought.
the only problem is actually getting the votes to eliminate the filibuster. they need 50 senators for this and again, none of the democrats will help. but a few republican senators will have a tough time voting for that.
we shall see.
of course, if they eliminate the filibuster and actually get their act together, all hope is lost.
the filibuster and their incompetence are our last hopes.
moonscape
(4,673 posts)like that Dems are able to block things they see would be a disaster for them.
unblock
(52,253 posts)Those last few republicans.
which is more awkward for them, defying the party or allowing some extreme things that would be hard to explain back home.
WinkyDink
(51,311 posts)LastLiberal in PalmSprings
(12,586 posts)Retroactive to the last election.
sarcasmo
(23,968 posts)arthritisR_US
(7,288 posts)Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin
(108,026 posts)They set their own rules not the President.
GatoGordo
(2,412 posts)But I think they ought to change the filibuster rules (talking filibuster) back to the way they were. (pre 1975)
Too much is not getting done in Congress. Imagine what could have been when Obama had to have only a simple majority.