• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every persons position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Senate filibuster abuse=Gridlock

James D Hill

DP Veteran
Joined
May 7, 2012
Messages
6,984
Reaction score
1,034
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Liberal
First you have the house GOP idiots with a 10% approval rating and the senate GOP which has 400 filibusters and counting. Their has been 16 Obama appointments filibustered while there has only been 20 in history before these nimrods took office. This is BS. The president has a right to fill his administration without GOP obstruction.

I can't believe Mitch O'Connell having the nerve to get mad when the senate GOP was called obstructionist. He acts like 400+ filibusters is normal business. How out of touch with reality can he be. The filibuster was designed so the minority party could be heard not a tool to gring government to a halt. Shame on you senate GOP. You are just as big of morons as the house GOP.
 

fmw

DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 2, 2013
Messages
12,361
Reaction score
3,358
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
The filibuster was designed so the minority party could be heard not a tool to gring government to a halt. Shame on you senate GOP. You are just as big of morons as the house GOP.
I don't care if any party gets heard but I do like the concept of bringing government to a halt. Long live the filibuster.
 

Fisher

DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 18, 2012
Messages
17,002
Reaction score
6,913
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Liberal
Is there ever a filibuster ever that someone on the other side does not consider abuse?
 

James D Hill

DP Veteran
Joined
May 7, 2012
Messages
6,984
Reaction score
1,034
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Liberal
I don't care if any party gets heard but I do like the concept of bringing government to a halt. Long live the filibuster.
That is stupid my friend. We elect those clowns to do a job. That is why we pay them so much. How is it good they are not earning their keep. How does gridlock benifit us? Not everything is political. The NLRB protects workers rights and we all benifit so how does the moronic GOP blocking nominations to that post benifit us? It does not. Do you want some asshole boss to have all the power no matter what a jerk he/she is?
 

James D Hill

DP Veteran
Joined
May 7, 2012
Messages
6,984
Reaction score
1,034
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Liberal
Is there ever a filibuster ever that someone on the other side does not consider abuse?
Fisher. Look at the numbers. Never before has there been so many filibusters and never before has cabinate nominations been blocked at this level. How can you say this is not abuse?
 

Unitedwestand13

DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 24, 2013
Messages
20,692
Reaction score
6,253
Location
Sunnyvale California
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
I don't care if any party gets heard but I do like the concept of bringing government to a halt. Long live the filibuster.
there is a point when a government that does not function becomes a liability. imagine if the same level of gridlock currently on display in senate was applied to every local and state government?
 

James D Hill

DP Veteran
Joined
May 7, 2012
Messages
6,984
Reaction score
1,034
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Liberal
there is a point when a government that does not function becomes a liability. imagine if the same level of gridlock currently on display in senate was applied to every local and state government?
That is my point. The libertarians and conservatives seem to think government has no use. If that was true then why do we pay them so much to do nothing. Like you said if the states of business was ran like that they would go under. I think the conservatives know they are at a disavantage so they use every dirty trick in the book to push their agenda. Last time I checked they lost the last election and the American people rejected their redneck views and they can't stand it so they are acting like Eric Cartman and wanting to go home.
 

TacticalEvilDan

Shankmasta Killa
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 16, 2008
Messages
10,444
Reaction score
4,479
Location
Western NY and Geneva, CH
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
I wonder if there's some service or function of the Executive that the Senate requires or finds extremely convenient. If there is, withholding it would make a sweet counterpoint.

Perhaps the Treasury Department could refuse to send the Senate their paychecks while the Senate refuses to address the business before it.
 

James D Hill

DP Veteran
Joined
May 7, 2012
Messages
6,984
Reaction score
1,034
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Liberal
I wonder if there's some service or function of the Executive that the Senate requires or finds extremely convenient. If there is, withholding it would make a sweet counterpoint.

Perhaps the Treasury Department could refuse to send the Senate their paychecks while the Senate refuses to address the business before it.
Or just the GOP members who have filibuster madness. The dem's have tried to do their job.
 

CanadaJohn

Canadian Conservative
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 27, 2013
Messages
28,637
Reaction score
20,383
Location
Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
First you have the house GOP idiots with a 10% approval rating and the senate GOP which has 400 filibusters and counting. Their has been 16 Obama appointments filibustered while there has only been 20 in history before these nimrods took office. This is BS. The president has a right to fill his administration without GOP obstruction.

I can't believe Mitch O'Connell having the nerve to get mad when the senate GOP was called obstructionist. He acts like 400+ filibusters is normal business. How out of touch with reality can he be. The filibuster was designed so the minority party could be heard not a tool to gring government to a halt. Shame on you senate GOP. You are just as big of morons as the house GOP.
I'd like to see the details of the Republican filibusters you speak about. It's my recollection, in the past, as when Trent Lott was Senate Majority Leader, he did not bring bills to the floor that he knew did not have the 60 votes necessary to override the filibuster. Seems to me Harry Reid does these filibuster test votes on a regular basis - he had several regarding the immigration bill this past month - if these votes are considered in the 400, it makes your claim far less compelling since if Lott had done the same when he was in charge, I'm pretty sure the Democrat minority at that time would have been just as obstructionist. Reid has just been better at putting it on the record.
 

Unitedwestand13

DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 24, 2013
Messages
20,692
Reaction score
6,253
Location
Sunnyvale California
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
I wonder if there's some service or function of the Executive that the Senate requires or finds extremely convenient. If there is, withholding it would make a sweet counterpoint.

Perhaps the Treasury Department could refuse to send the Senate their paychecks while the Senate refuses to address the business before it.
considering the fact that some of these senators are very wealthy people, i don't think that method would work 100%. but it is still a good idea.
 

James D Hill

DP Veteran
Joined
May 7, 2012
Messages
6,984
Reaction score
1,034
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Liberal
No, I don't think so. If you're going to deny paychecks you deny them all, this way it doesn't become a partisan tool.
Dude. 400+ filibusters just because they hate Obama. Think about it. Did the lib's filibuster Bush that much? Hell no.
 

James D Hill

DP Veteran
Joined
May 7, 2012
Messages
6,984
Reaction score
1,034
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Liberal
I'd like to see the details of the Republican filibusters you speak about. It's my recollection, in the past, as when Trent Lott was Senate Majority Leader, he did not bring bills to the floor that he knew did not have the 60 votes necessary to override the filibuster. Seems to me Harry Reid does these filibuster test votes on a regular basis - he had several regarding the immigration bill this past month - if these votes are considered in the 400, it makes your claim far less compelling since if Lott had done the same when he was in charge, I'm pretty sure the Democrat minority at that time would have been just as obstructionist. Reid has just been better at putting it on the record.
400+ filibusters just because they hate Obama. That is not right no matter your view is. The Dem's did not filibuster bush that much my friend.
 

Fisher

DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 18, 2012
Messages
17,002
Reaction score
6,913
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Liberal
Fisher. Look at the numbers. Never before has there been so many filibusters and never before has cabinate nominations been blocked at this level. How can you say this is not abuse?
That a Senator has the right to do this and avails himself of that right, then I do not think it is abuse. Stupid and petty perhaps, but both sides do it when they are in the minority, record level or not.
 

CanadaJohn

Canadian Conservative
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 27, 2013
Messages
28,637
Reaction score
20,383
Location
Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
400+ filibusters just because they hate Obama. That is not right no matter your view is. The Dem's did not filibuster bush that much my friend.
You didn't address my point, which probably means it's correct. The number of filibusters under Harry Reid's leadership simply means he's had more formal votes to test the filibuster than other more competent leaders who tried to seek compromise and common ground with the other side rather than grandstanding votes.
 

TacticalEvilDan

Shankmasta Killa
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 16, 2008
Messages
10,444
Reaction score
4,479
Location
Western NY and Geneva, CH
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
Dude. 400+ filibusters just because they hate Obama. Think about it. Did the lib's filibuster Bush that much? Hell no.
I don't care why they do it, the Senate is free to regulate itself. All I'm saying is that if it insists on sitting on Presidential appointments rather than discussing them for a reasonable period and then voting, the Executive should start refusing to do the jobs the Senate needs it to do.
 

TacticalEvilDan

Shankmasta Killa
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 16, 2008
Messages
10,444
Reaction score
4,479
Location
Western NY and Geneva, CH
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
define what "reasonable period of time" is when it comes to cabinet positions and judicial nominees.
Give everybody who wants to speak a chance to speak twice, after that they should vote.

It really doesn't matter what the number is, so long as a filibuster on Presidential appointments isn't indefinite.
 

Unitedwestand13

DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 24, 2013
Messages
20,692
Reaction score
6,253
Location
Sunnyvale California
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
Give everybody who wants to speak a chance to speak twice, after that they should vote.

It really doesn't matter what the number is, so long as a filibuster on Presidential appointments isn't indefinite.
forgive me for being cynical but i think the republicans are filibustering everything that Obama wants policy wise.
 

BMCM

DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 11, 2013
Messages
1,052
Reaction score
380
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
You didn't address my point, which probably means it's correct. The number of filibusters under Harry Reid's leadership simply means he's had more formal votes to test the filibuster than other more competent leaders who tried to seek compromise and common ground with the other side rather than grandstanding votes.
Show us the numbers. How many bills did Trent Lott put up for vote and how many has Reid put up. How many of each was filibustered?
 

CanadaJohn

Canadian Conservative
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 27, 2013
Messages
28,637
Reaction score
20,383
Location
Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
Show us the numbers. How many bills did Trent Lott put up for vote and how many has Reid put up. How many of each was filibustered?
I'm not the one defending the claim that the Republicans are more obstructionist than the Democrats were - the author of the OP is - your question would be better directed toward him. I simply made the point that from my observations, admittedly not scientific or mathematically scrutinized, that there were far fewer cloture votes brought to the floor of the Senate under Lott than Reid and that may have to do with the unwillingness of Reid to compromise and the willingness of Lott to compromise.

The Senate used to be a body that worked towards consensus before bills were pushed to the floor - not so under Reid.
 

Thrilla

DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 13, 2011
Messages
20,295
Reaction score
9,800
Location
Texas, Vegas, Colombia
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
I'm not the one defending the claim that the Republicans are more obstructionist than the Democrats were - the author of the OP is - your question would be better directed toward him. I simply made the point that from my observations, admittedly not scientific or mathematically scrutinized, that there were far fewer cloture votes brought to the floor of the Senate under Lott than Reid and that may have to do with the unwillingness of Reid to compromise and the willingness of Lott to compromise.

The Senate used to be a body that worked towards consensus before bills were pushed to the floor - not so under Reid.
that a very astute observation.

I've had my eye on Reid ever since we sent him to the hill ( he's my Senator)...those whom follow politics in Nevada knew about Reid, we all knew he was corrupt and a very very good political operator.
calling for cloture is a Reid hallmark... he does it a lot.. sometimes without a filibuster present or even threatened.

i'm not sure it's true that the Senate has historically fought for a consensus before bills were sent to the floor though.. I think it's more accurate to say they sought far more deliberation than we see now.

in any event, the climate in the Senate is certainly not driven by the GOP alone, as the OP and other Democrats want us to believe... a large part of the climate is Harry Reid himself.
oddly enough, I figured, when he was sent to the hill, he would find ways to remain faithful his party while he remained faithful to his ideology ( which is nowhere near as liberal as one might believe.. he's more conservative than many Republicans).. his obstructionism serves that purpose, as I see it.
 

fmw

DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 2, 2013
Messages
12,361
Reaction score
3,358
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
there is a point when a government that does not function becomes a liability. imagine if the same level of gridlock currently on display in senate was applied to every local and state government?
Local and state government aren't broken - at least they aren't around here. Our state, for instance has a balanced budget. Federal government is now so bloated that it can't manage itself, let alone govern. Hopefully we will get to a point where more people are disgusted with the whole thing and vote to reduce its size.
 

fmw

DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 2, 2013
Messages
12,361
Reaction score
3,358
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
That is stupid my friend. We elect those clowns to do a job. That is why we pay them so much. How is it good they are not earning their keep. How does gridlock benifit us? Not everything is political. The NLRB protects workers rights and we all benifit so how does the moronic GOP blocking nominations to that post benifit us? It does not. Do you want some asshole boss to have all the power no matter what a jerk he/she is?
Sorry, I don't respond to insults. Calling me stupid is a non starter for me.
 
Top Bottom