No, Hags, I'm not just piping up now that my team is in power. It just happens to be topical.
As I also previously mentioned, I don't think 60 is a "filibuster proof" number with respect to the composition of the body. Depending on the legislation, you can't count on the Democrats sticking together nor can you assume that no Republicans will be peeled off. I recently heard an analyst describe the Senate as a group of roaming tribes that often gathered regarding specific issues rather than party.
4 comments:
I will not speak to the constitutionality of this issue now since there are so many other constitutional issues I can talk about. What I will say is that the filibuster should have to be like it traditionally was with Senators having to speak for the entire time instead of this filibuster light they are getting away with now.
I think your suggestion is a good one. When that was the rule, Senators would only invoke the filibuster on matters of deep philosophical disagreement. Consequently, they were very rare.
And I think we need to keep these dumb MFers from further messing with our economic system.
Let em pontificate to waste.
Relax Jimmy, they'll be gone in 40 days!
Post a Comment