If Dems take Congress, Will the Cons try to rush bills before January?

[Norquist Nemesis]

I wonder if the Cons will try to rush through a whole bunch of legislation between November 8th and inauguration day.

My fingernails are going to be down to the quicks!

[FARAFIELD]

1. You are joking right?

Of course they will. But we can stop them in the senate with manuevers especially if we know we have 50/50 (the likely result) or if god willing we have 51/49. The biggest story will be still be Libermann and what he will do, under either scenario, 50/50 or 51/49 he will be courted. And we all know you can trust a word he said. Im blaming him for the results in CONN if any of our three go down.

[Norquist Nemesis]

4. Nope, not joking.

The thing about stopping them in the Senate that you're describing is...we'll still have the same Senate between now and January.

[FARAFIELD]

9. You didnt read close enough

I said that even though the senate will have the same makeup, we can stop them with manuevers procedurially so their numbers wont matter. All we will need are 41 votes for anything and with reelection past our incumbents wont care how it is percieved

[yurbud]

11. the 50/50 is the only reason Dems have to be nice to Lieberman if he wins

but I bet if it got down to that, he would show his true colors and side with the fascists.

[warrens]

2. It's hard to steamroll legislation

And the survivors are going to be very nervous about 2008. They can try, but they really only have a few weeks before the Xmas break.

The far right rule of the Repuke party is just about over, and the moderates and sane conservatives are not going to go along with some nutty hail mary pass.

[truebrit71]

3. Is the Pope Catholic? Of course they will...

And the first order of business for the new congress will be to repeal all of it...

[Norquist Nemesis]

5. Parliamentary question...does the current Congress certify the

elections, or is that just for Electoral votes?

[fob]

6. My worry is the republicks will change the rules for committees during

the lame duck session. They'll ramrod through rules that say that the current makeup of committees and committee chairperson's can't change just because the members change. They'll require 60 votes or 2/3rds to change the committees.

I hope to HELL I'm wrong, and secondarily that the Dems filibuster the fuck out of the place if they try, but I ain't gonna hold my breath.



NOTE: If you here trolling and are a repressed republick hypocrite, the use of the word "ramrod" in the above paragraph is not, I repeat, NOT sexual in nature.

fob

[Norquist Nemesis]

7. Rules changes don't bother me so much

because as I understand it, each Congress makes its own rules. Ramrodding (LOL!) legislation is another matter though. It could be a final 'bomb' thrown by Hastert and Frist joining together on their way out. In effect, it would really force a monkey wrench into things by trying to force a Democratic major to immediately deal with horrible laws hurredly passed (and derailing their first 100 hours pledge), or delay action on horrible laws hurredly passed which the GOP would try to use as a club in the upcoming 2008.

[fob]

8. I don't know. I don't think they'll have time to get legislation passed

but what if they did make it so the current repuke committee chairperson's remained in the new congress with a democratic majority? I think that's at least possible if not doable and would be much more damaging than any legislation they may get to. Although I agree that I'd hate to see any legislation come out of this lame duck session.

[zbdent]

10. History lesson - confident of their success in the 1998 election cycle,

Republicans kept calling for Bill Clinton's impeachment.

In the aftermath of the election, the horrified Republicans realized that they lost ground, and had to rush back to Washington DC to put through the articles and vote on the impeachment to commence, before all the newly-elected Dems were sworn in.

After that, Republicans sat on their thumbs and hoped that they could recover ...

(In the 2000 election, they still lost ground ... a pattern that had occurred in 1996, 1998, and 2000)

[roamer65]

12. Filibuster it ALL.