Yeah I’d hate to see us turn around and get Bork’d.
2 Likes
I don’t know. This wacko election has changed some fundamentals. For starters, complacently has taken a major hit. We are all freaked. Which is to say, FULLY engaged, now that we have been burdened with the knowledge that the entire center of this country has yet to enter the 21st century. Actually, they may have missed the 20th century. Then there is the little matter of all those millions of Latino voters who don’t vote. They are registered now. They VOTE. NOW.
So, things change. I don’t see any of us forgetting how important our votes are after this election.
3 Likes
$chumer…uggg…
It is entirely possible that if the GOP retain control of the Senate, they will continue the policy of refusing to consider any Democratic SCOTUS nominee. Let the Court dwindle. By 2020, Ginsberg and Breyer could be gone. With a GOP win in 2020, they will be able to fill 3 seats with conservatives, with a 50 vote majority rule on all nominations. It’s more important that Dems take control of the Senate this year and hold it in 2018 (admittedly, a tall order for this herd of cats).
4 Likes
I’ve read random comments here and there on Politico saying they expect the GOP to prevent all nominations, that all they have to do is man up and refuse all nominations because there is no requirement for there to be nine justices on the court, which is indeed true. Technically, a GOP Senate could block all Clinton nominations for all four years.
1 Like
41 votes to sustain, via roll call, for a period of X days of the session, at which point the President of the Senate is required to call for another vote to sustain, unless the ML has already done so or withdrawn the bill. Repeat the cycle until end of the session. Preserves the continuance of debate on substantive issues, does away with obstructionist nonsense.
2 Likes
Agreed. However, if the GOP actually follows through on their threats to block every single Clinton nominee, I say use the axe. Do I like that option? No. I used to believe the U.S. Senate was one of the best deliberative bodies the world has ever seen – and I think it was for a time … but that’s back when everyone played by the same rules of decorum, so-to-speak. IMO, it’s the Republicans who’ve already nuked the place.
3 Likes
No. This is a brush-back pitch and (2 metaphors for the price of one) the squeeze of the vise. Harry is exactly correct.
2 Likes
If you want to be pedantic about it, the United States of America is a representative democracy or a democratic republic. (Note the lower case – democracy and republic are not proper nouns.)
ETA:
Volokh points out (link above) that if you want to be really pedantic, the United States of America is a constitutional federal democratic republic.
3 Likes
After his sadly ironic reading of Green Eggs and Ham Ted Cruz should be required to speak only in rhyme.
4 Likes
Nuke 'em Harry. Nuke 'em 'til they glow…
1 Like
We’re being Borked right now.
2 Likes
Except that while the GOP will howl and scream about the destruction of “regular order”, and the “democrat party destroying comity in the Senate”, and countless other bullshit lines, I guarantee you that if they were to win the Senate and the Presidency, they would not only destroy the Filibuster in a split-second, they would blame the Democrats for “forcing us to do it”.
Someone has to do it. It has long outlived its usefulness. Might as well be the good guys that take that step first.
4 Likes
Not exactly, but don’t take my comment to inversion as an indication that I’m against this idea because I’m not - I think we should nuke the filibuster for court nominees.
We just need to be careful about how we wield that scalpel and not use it as an axe and cut off something of our own.
1 Like
Why shouldn’t they nuke the filibuster? Republicans have completely abused it and there’s no reason to take them at their word here. They would absolutely do the same thing if they were in a position to benefit.
1 Like
Not fear. The number of Dems up for reelection far outnumber the GOP in 2018. many in red states.
1 Like
I hoping they get a huuuge majority in the senate!
1 Like
Would agree with you on Schumer.
Problem is, he’s the D’s most prodigious fund-raiser and he’s always willing to share the $$$ as evidenced by this year’s activity. That ‘talent’ carries a lot of weight in our current system.
Besides, if Schumer’s good enough for Harry to pick over Durbin, then i have to go with Harry’s insight.
IMHO, Pelosi’s the most effective House Speaker of my lifetime.
Respectfully
3 Likes
Absolutely. I’d love to have her back.
4 Likes
I have thought of the filibuster as being something somewhat outside of the constitution. My suspicion is that it originally came about as something to preserve comity in the senate, in the sense that if the minority found something to be truly a threat to their most basic interests, they had a last resort available.
The republicans under McConnell have so abused the filibuster as to make it meaningless for that purpose, by destroying the basic level of respect and trust required for “comity” to exist. Very short-sighted and foolhardy thing to do, to my mind.
4 Likes