Second Amendment Harry Reid Moves to Destroy the Senate Rules that are Blocking Passage of Gun Control

Discussion in 'Bill of Rights' started by DarkLight, Jul 11, 2013.

  1. DarkLight

    DarkLight Live Long and Prosper - On Hiatus

    Got the notification about this via email and then hit the source:

    Harry Reid Moves to Destroy the Senate Rules that are Blocking Passage of Gun Control - Gun Owners of America
    Mountainman and Pax Mentis like this.
  2. tulianr

    tulianr Don Quixote de la Monkey

    While I acknowledge the potential for abuse that this rule change carries with it, and the potential for unintended consequences, I also think that the confirmation process has become a ridiculous game to the idiots in the Senate. I believe that the idea of Senate confirmation of cabinet appointees was instituted to prevent political cronyism and unlimited partisan control of the executive branch; but certainly during my lifetime, the Senate has turned the confirmation process into a perverse political game show. It is nothing but political partisanship. I'd like to see the process streamlined.

    And frankly, while I applaud the use of the filibuster when it is used to support positions that I agree with, I deplore it when it is used to oppose positions that I agree with. I'm not sure that, in general, it's conducive to the conduct of appropriate legislative business. It just gives our non-representatives the excuse to get absolutely nothing accomplished while being paid with our money.
  3. natshare

    natshare Monkey+++

    The funny thing is, the leftists believe that by pointing their finger at the right, and yelling about how obstructionist they are, they'll win more votes.....but that the same voters who are smart enough to figure that out, won't notice that the left is cheating the system, and pushing their agenda, and the consequences be damned!
  4. tulianr

    tulianr Don Quixote de la Monkey

    Here's a piece on the filibuster question that I thought was interesting.

    Why the constitutional option on the filibuster matters

    By Scott Bomboy

    Majority leader Harry Reid is edging closer to ending the filibuster in the Senate for some types of votes. So why does the nuclear or constitutional option about the filibuster matter so much?

    According to reports on Wednesday, Reid and Democrats in the Senate will huddle this week to decide on a procedural move to kill the filibuster for executive-branch nominations by ensuring there is a time limit on debate on the floor along with a time limit on votes.

    The filibuster matters because it allows the minority party in the Senate to block votes on executive and judicial nominees, and legislation, by forcing 60 of the 100 Senate members to agree to end a debate.

    Since the Democrats don’t control 60 Senate votes, the Republicans have been able to block nominations or get concessions without having a Senate majority.

    The Democrats are upset with Republican resistance to several nominations made by President Barack Obama to head executive agencies.

    A key point appears to be a potential “silent” filibuster of appointments to the National Labor Relations Board. Three of the five NLRB members were recess appointments by President Obama.

    A court challenge to the filibuster from Common Cause was shot down last December in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia.

    “The court is firmly convinced that to intrude into this area would offend the separation of powers on which the Constitution rests,” Judge Emmet Sullivan said. “Nowhere does the Constitution contain express requirements regarding the proper length of, or method for, the Senate to debate proposed legislation.”

    In fact, the House also had the filibuster at one time, but it ended its use in 1842.

    The Senate battle has been brewing since January, when Reid and Minority Leader Mitch McConnell reached a compromise on filibuster rules.

    The nomination of Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel was then subject to a filibuster, which ruffled a lot of feathers.

    The Senate eventually voted 71-27 to end the “silent filibuster” over Hagel’s appointment that blocked him from getting a confirmation vote.

    The move was unprecedented for a high-level cabinet nominee and came just little more than a month after Democrats and Republicans reached that filibuster reform deal.

    As leverage, Republican leaders have stressed that things could change in 2014 and the Democrats could lose big if they kill the filibuster and become the new minority party in the Senate.

    The theory is that historically, the party that has won the White House and controlled the Senate fares poorly in midterm elections, and it could be the Democrats that benefit in the long run from rules that give a minority party the power of the filibuster.

    Reid has been a staunch supporter of keeping the filibuster and has brokered deals before to keep it in place.

    Why the constitutional option on the filibuster matters
survivalmonkey SSL seal warrant canary