If the Dems Strengthen their Hold On the Senate, Will They Ditch the Filibuster?

Nov 28, 2010
80,047
33,299
113
Maryland
Biden has promised that if America gives him 2 more D Senators, he will make abortion legal nationally.

Pretty sure that kind of legislation doesn't qualify for reconciliation treatment. So that sounds like he expects the Senate to get rid of the filibuster.

How do you feel about that?

If the Dems ditch the filibuster, what other reforms would you like to see them enact?
 
Nov 28, 2010
80,047
33,299
113
Maryland
What would be the point?
Codify legal abortion.

Pass the Right to Vote act.

Maybe revisit going greener, although the war's beneficial impact on Big Oil's profits and negative impact on gas and heating may prevent that.

Improvements to Medicare.

What else have the Dems tried to do that Manchin and Sinema effed up?

Sure, sure, the Rs will just try to reverse some of those things. But trying doesn't mean succeeding. If Dems can get off their asses and implement some good changes, they might be hard to reverse. Plus, if the Dems can actually do good things for a couple of years, they might not lose in 2024.

Those are the point.
 
Feb 9, 2013
21,121
59,221
113
Codify legal abortion.

Pass the Right to Vote act.

Maybe revisit going greener, although the war's beneficial impact on Big Oil's profits and negative impact on gas and heating may prevent that.

Improvements to Medicare.

What else have the Dems tried to do that Manchin and Sinema effed up?

Sure, sure, the Rs will just try to reverse some of those things. But trying doesn't mean succeeding. If Dems can get off their asses and implement some good changes, they might be hard to reverse. Plus, if the Dems can actually do good things for a couple of years, they might not lose in 2024.

Those are the point.
You know the GOP is taking the House, right?
 

sober_teacher

HR Legend
Mar 26, 2007
14,289
18,017
113
Codify legal abortion.

Pass the Right to Vote act.

Maybe revisit going greener, although the war's beneficial impact on Big Oil's profits and negative impact on gas and heating may prevent that.

Improvements to Medicare.

What else have the Dems tried to do that Manchin and Sinema effed up?

Sure, sure, the Rs will just try to reverse some of those things. But trying doesn't mean succeeding. If Dems can get off their asses and implement some good changes, they might be hard to reverse. Plus, if the Dems can actually do good things for a couple of years, they might not lose in 2024.

Those are the point.

You know the GOP is taking the House, right?
It’s a moot point unless the Dems somehow hold the House.
 
Jul 16, 2022
1,401
2,731
113
It's a big "If" that they would extend beyond 50/50. More importantly, I don't think they would do it because in 2024 the Dems are defending 23 Senate Seats and the Republicans are only defending 10 seats. They would have to be pretty short-sighted to not think that strategy would flip on it's head after 2024. Just my two cents.

 

binsfeldcyhawk2

HR Legend
Gold Member
Oct 13, 2006
27,502
37,064
113
I would like to see the filibuster at the very least be significantly modified so that requirements are in place to indefinitely block a bill. % of the senate that must be present, must hold the floor by actually speaking etc.

it shouldn’t be a de facto veto.
Changing the filibuster to a 55 vote threshold is reasonable IMO.

A bare majority threshold the D's have been pressing is a recipe for some serious policy whiplash.
 

Chishawk1425

HR Legend
Nov 27, 2019
49,976
85,480
113
Codify legal abortion.

Pass the Right to Vote act.

Maybe revisit going greener, although the war's beneficial impact on Big Oil's profits and negative impact on gas and heating may prevent that.

Improvements to Medicare.

What else have the Dems tried to do that Manchin and Sinema effed up?

Sure, sure, the Rs will just try to reverse some of those things. But trying doesn't mean succeeding. If Dems can get off their asses and implement some good changes, they might be hard to reverse. Plus, if the Dems can actually do good things for a couple of years, they might not lose in 2024.

Those are the point.
This they'll never get 10 Republicans to do anything so they MUST
 
Nov 28, 2010
80,047
33,299
113
Maryland
It's a big "If" that they would extend beyond 50/50. More importantly, I don't think they would do it because in 2024 the Dems are defending 23 Senate Seats and the Republicans are only defending 10 seats. They would have to be pretty short-sighted to not think that strategy would flip on it's head after 2024. Just my two cents.

My argument is that if the Dems can't deliver between now and 2024, we could be seeing a tidal wave of red.

Let me restate that. Unless the Dems can deliver now, America is Fvcked.

So . . . quit being timid Dems.

Of course the Dems may lose both chambers of Congress this time, but if they don't they need to be very bold.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: Hawkeyenuts66
Feb 9, 2013
21,121
59,221
113
My argument is that if the Dems can't deliver between now and 2024, we could be seeing a tidal wave of red.

Let me restate that. Unless the Dems can deliver now, America is Fvcked.

So . . . quit being timid Dems.

Of course the Dems may lose both chambers of Congress this time, but if they don't they need to be very bold.
But it’s too late to do anything. I think we are where we are.
Other than appointing judges the Biden Administration is basically done.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MitchLL

Chishawk1425

HR Legend
Nov 27, 2019
49,976
85,480
113
It should be hard, not easy to change laws, and that's why it is the way it is.

Want an abortion law? Work together and come up with on everyone can support. Over 70% of Americans favor abortions before the 16th week, start there and get something done.
It should be majority rule and there shouldn't be an Electoral college anymore. Antiquated shit built to keep minorities down
 

Chishawk1425

HR Legend
Nov 27, 2019
49,976
85,480
113
But it’s too late to do anything. I think we are where we are.
Other than appointing judges the Biden Administration is basically done.
And has passed more legislation and sweeping changes in under 2 years than any administration since at least LBJ if that's the case
 
Nov 28, 2010
80,047
33,299
113
Maryland
But it’s too late to do anything. I think we are where we are.
Other than appointing judges the Biden Administration is basically done.
If they win, they can turn that around.

The question was whether they should ditch the filibuster if they win. Saying they won't win may turn out to be true, but it's not an answer to the question.

What's your answer to the question?
 
Jul 16, 2022
1,401
2,731
113
My argument is that if the Dems can't deliver between now and 2024, we could be seeing a tidal wave of red.

Let me restate that. Unless the Dems can deliver now, America is Fvcked.

So . . . quit being timid Dems.

Of course the Dems may lose both chambers of Congress this time, but if they don't they need to be very bold.
I see your point ... we shall see.

 

binsfeldcyhawk2

HR Legend
Gold Member
Oct 13, 2006
27,502
37,064
113
It's a risk. But it's also a recipe for getting shit done.

Plus, it has the advantage of being more democratic.
Ummm...if you think one party forcing through their agenda just to be undone when the other party takes over and that party forces through their agenda with a bare majority is good governance I have to disagree.
 
Feb 9, 2013
21,121
59,221
113
If they win, they can turn that around.

The question was whether they should ditch the filibuster if they win. Saying they won't win may turn out to be true, but it's not an answer to the question.

What's your answer to the question?
Sorry, I prefer to deal with reality. Biden is going to be tied up with investigation after hearing after investigation after hearing. And likely impeachment. Going to be tough having these nuts in the House in charge.
 

notlongago

HR Heisman
Jul 28, 2012
5,440
2,673
113
Biden has promised that if America gives him 2 more D Senators, he will make abortion legal nationally.

Pretty sure that kind of legislation doesn't qualify for reconciliation treatment. So that sounds like he expects the Senate to get rid of the filibuster.

How do you feel about that?

If the Dems ditch the filibuster, what other reforms would you like to see them enact?
It takes a very short sighted, illogical and, frankly, unintelligent person to support ending the fillibuster.
 

sober_teacher

HR Legend
Mar 26, 2007
14,289
18,017
113
Not really. At least as it exists today, it wont cause a cascade of reactionary, fringe policies & laws with every swing of the pendulum.

As it exists today, it’s a de facto veto. Instead of fostering debate and compromise, it’s used to kill any bill the minority party doesn’t like.

Especially based on the political environment today, the odds of either party getting to a filibuster-proof supermajority are extremely slim for the foreseeable future. Either party will find it impossible to enact the agenda they were voted into office to pass.
 

notlongago

HR Heisman
Jul 28, 2012
5,440
2,673
113
As it exists today, it’s a de facto veto. Instead of fostering debate and compromise, it’s used to kill any bill the minority party doesn’t like.

Especially based on the political environment today, the odds of either party getting to a filibuster-proof supermajority are extremely slim for the foreseeable future. Either party will find it impossible to enact the agenda they were voted into office to pass.
But again, that is much preferred over the alternative of political whiplash every 2-4 years.
Furthermore, not every election cycle needs an agenda - theres a lot to be said for maintenance.
 

sober_teacher

HR Legend
Mar 26, 2007
14,289
18,017
113
But again, that is much preferred over the alternative of political whiplash every 2-4 years.
Furthermore, not every election cycle needs an agenda - theres a lot to be said for maintenance.

I disagree - not least of the reasons people are always mad with Congress is that nothing ever gets done. This, despite the fact that whether we like it or not, they are effectively blocked from even seriously attempting to carry through on their campaign promises because it’s near-impossible to get a super-majority in one chamber of Congress.

Agreed that not every session of Congress needs some major agenda to pass, but there’s plenty of stuff with broad popular support that a healthy majority of the country wants, but is blocked before the ink on the proposed bill is even dry.
 
  • Like
Reactions: nelly02
Feb 9, 2013
21,121
59,221
113
I don’t like it mostly because it eliminates the need for debate and for senators to go on record. They can hide behind the filibuster without really ever having to take a stand on anything. Compromises and negotiation could result in some pretty solid legislation, but we have less of that because the numbers make most deal-making irrelevant.

I am convinced being a US Senator is one of the easiest and cushiest jobs in government.
 

notlongago

HR Heisman
Jul 28, 2012
5,440
2,673
113
I disagree - not least of the reasons people are always mad with Congress is that nothing ever gets done. This, despite the fact that whether we like it or not, they are effectively blocked from even seriously attempting to carry through on their campaign promises because it’s near-impossible to get a super-majority in one chamber of Congress.

Agreed that not every session of Congress needs some major agenda to pass, but there’s plenty of stuff with broad popular support that a healthy majority of the country wants, but is blocked before the ink on the proposed bill is even dry.
You disagree your rather have political whiplash every cycle? Now I know you're just arguing to argue. No sensible person wants that.
 

sober_teacher

HR Legend
Mar 26, 2007
14,289
18,017
113
You disagree your rather have political whiplash every cycle? Now I know you're just arguing to argue. No sensible person wants that.

It’s only political whiplash because both parties refuse to compromise.

The current system, filibuster included, simply is not working right now. The filibuster was meant to foster debate/compromise. Now it’s being used to simply kill any legislation the opposition party doesn’t like without ANY attempt to work together.
 

notlongago

HR Heisman
Jul 28, 2012
5,440
2,673
113
It’s only political whiplash because both parties refuse to compromise.

The current system, filibuster included, simply is not working right now. The filibuster was meant to foster debate/compromise. Now it’s being used to simply kill any legislation the opposition party doesn’t like without ANY attempt to work together.
And enabling radical ideas and policies will just exacerbate the issue.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ICHerky

sober_teacher

HR Legend
Mar 26, 2007
14,289
18,017
113
And enabling radical ideas and policies will just exacerbate the issue.

Sometimes yes. But we’re also talking about stuff that enjoys broad support from the general population, like codifying Roe into law.

Just because an idea is proposed by one side or the other doesn’t mean it’s automatically a radical one. But that’s where we’re at now - kill any idea you don’t like and don’t make any attempt to find common ground.