Then you remember WRONG, the rule change happen in 1975. If you look at the number of Fillibusters each year, you will see the number increase dramatically after 1975.
From what I understand is sometime after 9/11 Congress needed to get a bunch of stuff done, so they essentially agreed to new Senate rules that allowed Senators to essentially anonymously file paper work to have a filibuster. At the time it was done as a time saver however we can all see that its being misused and its time to reform it. Simply change the Senate rule (this does not involve the constitution) to go back to "stand your ass up and talk" to filibuster. That way we would all know EXACTLY whom is opposing a bill and WHY they oppose it. I feel that would prevent the useless filibusters to prevent the opposing side from passing good legislation and anyone whose main interest is to gum up the works would be exposed. If its an item none of us want passed then that Senator is the hero.
Once again this is my brief overview of it so I could be slightly off although I'm sure someone will let me know.
Did you even read that article you referenced?
The GOP has abused the filibuster. They are the reason it needs to, and will be, changed.
If the Democrats are stupid enough to fall for this line, they deserve to keep getting blocked. It presumes that if the Democrats keep the filibuster as it is now, that the Republicans will also not change it the next time they get power. Which is a sucker's bet.
And it's the Democratic senators' job to prevent the filibuster from being abused to block everything under the sun. The filibuster is not a constitutional requirements -- it's a senate procedure that was set up for a specific purpose by agreement of both parties. If one of them is going to abuse it, as the GOP has for the last two years, it needs to be overhauled or eliminated.
Yes, in the same way that 68 (all time high for Democrats in 2006-2007) is about as much as over 100 (for each of the 3 two-year sessions since including 139 in the 2008-2009 session). Yup, 139 is about as much as 68.The democrats abused it about a much. Both sides abuse it.
The Republicans don't say "No" to everything. Lay the majority of the blame at the feet of Majority leader Reid. The Republican Senators are doing what they can to stop bad laws and bad nominations from being passed, it's their job.
Yes, in the same way that 68 (all time high for Democrats in 2006-2007) is about as much as over 100 (for each of the 3 two-year sessions since including 139 in the 2008-2009 session). Yup, 139 is about as much as 68.
stinkprogress and commiejones are links I can really believe in!
Can you refute the evidence with another source?
Can you refute the evidence with another source?
I don't even bother. You want to link stormfront or other crap sites I wouldn't go to those either.
Yes, in the same way that 68 (all time high for Democrats in 2006-2007) is about as much as over 100 (for each of the 3 two-year sessions since including 139 in the 2008-2009 session). Yup, 139 is about as much as 68.
stinkprogress and commiejones are links I can really believe in!
Try making a rational argument. You know, just for a change of pace.
]I did and got a "Harry Reid says it's all the Republicans fault" reply[/B].
and honestly a link to thinkprogress? That's like linking to Jihadwatch.com in a middle eastern thread.
I did and got a "Harry Reid says it's all the Republicans fault" reply.
The Republicans don't say "No" to everything. Lay the majority of the blame at the feet of Majority leader Reid. The Republican Senators are doing what they can to stop bad laws and bad nominations from being passed, it's their job.
stinkprogress and commiejones are links I can really believe in!