Opposing filibusters
Steve Benen has a good rundown of House Democrats' frustration with the fact that their legislation can't make it past the filibuster onslaught in the Senate.
When Dems were in the Senate minority, the GOP wouldn’t let Democratic bills move. With Dems in the Senate majority, the GOP is blocking almost every piece of legislation it can from even coming up for a vote. Indeed, the Senate GOP is on track to block more legislation in the 110th Congress than any in history — filibustering at triple the usual rate.It's hard to know what to say about this state of affairs--Republican petulance in this Congress is literally breathtaking, and the Democrats have sadly few options. But it's hard not to conclude that, to some extent, Senate Republicans are threatening to filibuster every significant issue the Democrats float because they know they'll never be forced to put their mouths where their mouths are. Harry Reid probably should have forced a real filibuster, exposed the obstructionism, a long time ago. But better late than never.
Comments
The GOP gets away with this because the media doesn't cover it. But real live all-night, all-day sessions filled with bloviating Republicans would get at least some attention.
Since nothing is getting done, the Dems can't do worse than make the GOP's antics public. Very public. Make the GOP go on CSPAN and explain themselves - knowing that YouTubes of their speeches will be used against them in the 08 elections.
If the Dems won't stay until the job gets done, then they don't deserve the majority. But since it seems clear the GOP will lose more seats in the next session of Congress, the GOP must get the message now that the Dems will play hardball not only with the GOP but with any wavering Dems that vote with the GOP as well.
Notice that the Congress (Zogby Poll) is now down to 11% approval. That's almost as bad is Bush's 24%. Congressional disapproval is not the result of what Congress has done, but what Congress hasn't done - stand up to Bush/Cheney and the GOP.
My bad: I didn't realize the Senate rules were changed to not require a real talking filibuster. Apparently if 41 Senators sign something, no talking is required. (from comments at Benen's place). And, to end a no-talking filibuster, 60 votes are still required to proceed to a final vote.
Post A Comment