Just as a reminder: the filibuster is NOT in the Constitution. There is no legal reason to maintain it. And the notion that a minority can override the will of the people is as undemocratic as it gets. (Minority rights must be respected and protected of course, but the filibuster isn't the way to do it.)
Seriously Chris! Joe Manchin criticizes Kamala over her support for eliminating the filibuster for a law establishing a nationwide right to abortion and she is supposed to feel harmed by this? So she changed her position. So what. The Supreme Court changed its position and the vast majority of the country disagrees with them and agrees with Harris. She knows she can’t get that law passed with the filibuster in place so she is advocating for a change in tactics. That’s called legislating, which is something Republicans used to do before being taken over by crazy ideologues. As for Manchin, he also said the filibuster is the holy grail of democracy. Could have fooled the father of the Constitution, James Madison, who ALWAYS favored majority rule and not what has, in effect. Become minority rule thanks to the filibuster
It's not "minority rule." It's a minority veto with a 60 vote override provision. The Republicans will probably win the Senate this time around. If Trump wins the Presidency, he'll probably carry the House with him. Are you sure that you want to eliminate the last vestiges of the filibuster? We have our current Supreme Court because Harry Reid wanted what he wanted right now and couldn't see a few years into the future.
Yeah totally. She just changes her opinion as much as former Pres. Trump, yet democrats call it “legislating” when she does it, and unhinged flip flopping when former Pres. Trump does it.
I wonder where was Joe Manchin when McConnell bypassed the Fillibuster to appoint his Sup Court Judges. By the way who cares about Joe Manchin's endorsement. Harris surely does not need his endorsement to win in November
Actually, it was Harry Reid who got rid of the filibuster as to lower court judges and then McConnell followed suit by eliminating it as to the SCOTUS. That illustrates why the Ds eliminating the filibuster as to one key issue would give license to the Rs to retaliate when they regain control. There are other ways to get the job done.
You're absolutely right. The filibuster is the only thing that keeps the two tribes talking to each other. I'm a Dem, but the fact is that we were the ones that started this food fight.
Because R’s chose to grind judicial nominations to a halt during Obama’s presidency and it worked all too well. The number of vacancies was ridiculous. They didn’t object to certain judges. It was a total blockade and causing many problems. But that doesn’t make headlines the same way a government shut down does.
All true. And it ultimately led to the Ds being powerless to stop Trump’s 3 SCOTUS nominees, and that led to the end of Roe. The root of many of our problems is the descent of the GOP into madness, with the “burn it all down” faction combining with the ruthlessness and cunning of McConnell.
“The filibuster is the Holy Grail of democracy”?!?!?
What bullshit.
if the filibuster is the “Holy Grail of democracy” it could have easily been incorporated in the Constitution as a super majority is required for several instances like overriding a presidential veto and Impeachment.
Joe Manchin shows once again that he is an ENEMY of democracy via his refusal to recognize that today’s radical right wing Republican Party is not a functioning political party that deserves the benefit of doubt that they even know what acting in good faith even means.
They don’t.
Compromise is a dirty word for today’s Trump infested GOP cult and Manchin’s delusion that the filibuster is some kind of savior of “bi-partisanship” is absurd.
At the very least the filibuster needs some serous reform. One party (yes, the GOP is the party that has made abusing the filibuster as a requirement for anything to get passed) being enabled while in the minority to stop the will of the majority is the OPPOSITE of the “Holy Grail of democracy”.
Note that Harris talked about eliminating the filibuster “for Roe”. This would follow the examples set by Harry Reid for non-SCOTUS federal judges, which Mitch McConnell then extended to SCOTUS nominees (for Gorsuch in 2017). At some point, we got rid of the filibuster for all federal appointees requiring Senate confirmation. The filibuster also does not apply to Budget Reconciliation measures … Byrd rule or something?…. (which I think has a limit of 3 per year or something). In that sense, the filibuster has been slowly getting eroded. I guess the concern is that if it’s eliminated just for “freedom of reproductive choice” matters by the Dems, then the GOP will similarly eliminate for one of their pet issues down the road when they control the Senate. A better measure than a filibuster would be requiring non-Reconciliation legislation to be passed with at least one vote from a Senator who caucuses with the minority. Would that work in general? It would work for reinstating Roe legislatively because of Susan Collins and Lisa Murkowski.
Not a lawyer, but the filibuster seems reasonable for some issues and not so much for others. I just don't know where the line is drawn, and as mentioned by others, it is not in the Constitution. For better or worse, whether it is used for something I support (or not), seems immaterial. I struggle with a vote on an issue coming up 59-41 and people saying, "Well, we don't have a clear majority here." To me, 51-49 is a clear majority.
BTW, great still pic from Mr. Smith Goes to Washington. Wonderful Capra film with fantastic performances by Jimmy Stewart, Jean Arthur, Claude Rains, and a perfect small role for Harry Carey. Well worth watching.
While I don't like the filibuster concept, I have reservations concerning its elimination. A more effective approach to the matter would be to "make them talk", as it once was. All other Senate activity halted until debate of the matter in conflict ended. Because of the impact of such a halt, the present scheme of the "silent filibuster" was implemented - and abused. At one time, a "countdown" approach to the number of votes needed for cloture was suggested. As time goes on, the number of votes needed decreases until it reaches 51. That might be a better approach.
Re the filibuster: Of course this will happen. It was inevitable once McConnell changed the rules for Supreme Court nominees. It's a rule not a law, and once one side decides to play the rules all bets are off. The senate was created as a place for wiser minds. We have no more of those.
McConnell eliminated the filibuster as to the SCOTUS only after Reid did so as to lower courts. Rs would similarly retaliate if Ds lifted the filibuster as to abortion. See my broader comment for more on this.
I would like to see the filibuster gone ..no matter what.. and I would also like to see the electoral college gone... And if the gop gets control and they pass crazy right wing laws it could be there down fall ..It is exhausting living in a country that is continually controlled by the minority. They will do anything to get and keep power ..
Holy crap, Chris! First there was The Only Plane in the Sky, and now Silver Patron Saints! I've been listening to this in my car since the weekend after seeing the CBS Morning piece on Jesse Malin. It's a fantastic album, and the story of how his fellow artists have gotten behind him was truly uplifting, something I'm trying to find more of in . . . these times.
I like the filibuster. But even if it was a good idea to get rid of it, it’s poor politics given that the GOP is likely to regain control of the senate
I might be wrong on this, but I think she meant she wanted to eliminate the filibuster to vote on Roe only, not a wholesale elimination. As was done with judges.
Forgive me for speaking out of turn here, but I was wondering what your thoughts were on neo-con Harris flying Zelensky out to Pennsylvania on an Air Force C-17 and having him attempt to influence the election by bad mouthing former Pres. Trump and Sen. Vance. I thought the democrats were staunchly against any foreign interference in the election.
Just as a reminder: the filibuster is NOT in the Constitution. There is no legal reason to maintain it. And the notion that a minority can override the will of the people is as undemocratic as it gets. (Minority rights must be respected and protected of course, but the filibuster isn't the way to do it.)
Minority rights are expressly respected and protected in the Bill of Rights. Agree that the filibuster is completely undemocratic.
Seriously Chris! Joe Manchin criticizes Kamala over her support for eliminating the filibuster for a law establishing a nationwide right to abortion and she is supposed to feel harmed by this? So she changed her position. So what. The Supreme Court changed its position and the vast majority of the country disagrees with them and agrees with Harris. She knows she can’t get that law passed with the filibuster in place so she is advocating for a change in tactics. That’s called legislating, which is something Republicans used to do before being taken over by crazy ideologues. As for Manchin, he also said the filibuster is the holy grail of democracy. Could have fooled the father of the Constitution, James Madison, who ALWAYS favored majority rule and not what has, in effect. Become minority rule thanks to the filibuster
It's not "minority rule." It's a minority veto with a 60 vote override provision. The Republicans will probably win the Senate this time around. If Trump wins the Presidency, he'll probably carry the House with him. Are you sure that you want to eliminate the last vestiges of the filibuster? We have our current Supreme Court because Harry Reid wanted what he wanted right now and couldn't see a few years into the future.
Yeah totally. She just changes her opinion as much as former Pres. Trump, yet democrats call it “legislating” when she does it, and unhinged flip flopping when former Pres. Trump does it.
I wonder where was Joe Manchin when McConnell bypassed the Fillibuster to appoint his Sup Court Judges. By the way who cares about Joe Manchin's endorsement. Harris surely does not need his endorsement to win in November
Actually, it was Harry Reid who got rid of the filibuster as to lower court judges and then McConnell followed suit by eliminating it as to the SCOTUS. That illustrates why the Ds eliminating the filibuster as to one key issue would give license to the Rs to retaliate when they regain control. There are other ways to get the job done.
You're absolutely right. The filibuster is the only thing that keeps the two tribes talking to each other. I'm a Dem, but the fact is that we were the ones that started this food fight.
Because R’s chose to grind judicial nominations to a halt during Obama’s presidency and it worked all too well. The number of vacancies was ridiculous. They didn’t object to certain judges. It was a total blockade and causing many problems. But that doesn’t make headlines the same way a government shut down does.
All true. And it ultimately led to the Ds being powerless to stop Trump’s 3 SCOTUS nominees, and that led to the end of Roe. The root of many of our problems is the descent of the GOP into madness, with the “burn it all down” faction combining with the ruthlessness and cunning of McConnell.
“The filibuster is the Holy Grail of democracy”?!?!?
What bullshit.
if the filibuster is the “Holy Grail of democracy” it could have easily been incorporated in the Constitution as a super majority is required for several instances like overriding a presidential veto and Impeachment.
Joe Manchin shows once again that he is an ENEMY of democracy via his refusal to recognize that today’s radical right wing Republican Party is not a functioning political party that deserves the benefit of doubt that they even know what acting in good faith even means.
They don’t.
Compromise is a dirty word for today’s Trump infested GOP cult and Manchin’s delusion that the filibuster is some kind of savior of “bi-partisanship” is absurd.
At the very least the filibuster needs some serous reform. One party (yes, the GOP is the party that has made abusing the filibuster as a requirement for anything to get passed) being enabled while in the minority to stop the will of the majority is the OPPOSITE of the “Holy Grail of democracy”.
Good riddance Joe.
Note that Harris talked about eliminating the filibuster “for Roe”. This would follow the examples set by Harry Reid for non-SCOTUS federal judges, which Mitch McConnell then extended to SCOTUS nominees (for Gorsuch in 2017). At some point, we got rid of the filibuster for all federal appointees requiring Senate confirmation. The filibuster also does not apply to Budget Reconciliation measures … Byrd rule or something?…. (which I think has a limit of 3 per year or something). In that sense, the filibuster has been slowly getting eroded. I guess the concern is that if it’s eliminated just for “freedom of reproductive choice” matters by the Dems, then the GOP will similarly eliminate for one of their pet issues down the road when they control the Senate. A better measure than a filibuster would be requiring non-Reconciliation legislation to be passed with at least one vote from a Senator who caucuses with the minority. Would that work in general? It would work for reinstating Roe legislatively because of Susan Collins and Lisa Murkowski.
I hope there's a way for us who don't live in the DMV to watch your show, it sounds like a lot of fun.
Joe Manchin is such a gasbag who loves to hear the sound of his own voice. I'm sure he'll run to a bunch of Sunday shows and whine some more.
Not a lawyer, but the filibuster seems reasonable for some issues and not so much for others. I just don't know where the line is drawn, and as mentioned by others, it is not in the Constitution. For better or worse, whether it is used for something I support (or not), seems immaterial. I struggle with a vote on an issue coming up 59-41 and people saying, "Well, we don't have a clear majority here." To me, 51-49 is a clear majority.
BTW, great still pic from Mr. Smith Goes to Washington. Wonderful Capra film with fantastic performances by Jimmy Stewart, Jean Arthur, Claude Rains, and a perfect small role for Harry Carey. Well worth watching.
While I don't like the filibuster concept, I have reservations concerning its elimination. A more effective approach to the matter would be to "make them talk", as it once was. All other Senate activity halted until debate of the matter in conflict ended. Because of the impact of such a halt, the present scheme of the "silent filibuster" was implemented - and abused. At one time, a "countdown" approach to the number of votes needed for cloture was suggested. As time goes on, the number of votes needed decreases until it reaches 51. That might be a better approach.
Re the filibuster: Of course this will happen. It was inevitable once McConnell changed the rules for Supreme Court nominees. It's a rule not a law, and once one side decides to play the rules all bets are off. The senate was created as a place for wiser minds. We have no more of those.
McConnell eliminated the filibuster as to the SCOTUS only after Reid did so as to lower courts. Rs would similarly retaliate if Ds lifted the filibuster as to abortion. See my broader comment for more on this.
Correct! I forgot that. My wiser minds applies even more!
Like I pointed out above - because R’s blockaded ALL judicial nominees.
I would like to see the filibuster gone ..no matter what.. and I would also like to see the electoral college gone... And if the gop gets control and they pass crazy right wing laws it could be there down fall ..It is exhausting living in a country that is continually controlled by the minority. They will do anything to get and keep power ..
Holy crap, Chris! First there was The Only Plane in the Sky, and now Silver Patron Saints! I've been listening to this in my car since the weekend after seeing the CBS Morning piece on Jesse Malin. It's a fantastic album, and the story of how his fellow artists have gotten behind him was truly uplifting, something I'm trying to find more of in . . . these times.
I believe the filibuster should be kept intact. The Senate was designed to encourage more of a consensus than was the House.
I like the filibuster. But even if it was a good idea to get rid of it, it’s poor politics given that the GOP is likely to regain control of the senate
I might be wrong on this, but I think she meant she wanted to eliminate the filibuster to vote on Roe only, not a wholesale elimination. As was done with judges.
Hey Chris,
Forgive me for speaking out of turn here, but I was wondering what your thoughts were on neo-con Harris flying Zelensky out to Pennsylvania on an Air Force C-17 and having him attempt to influence the election by bad mouthing former Pres. Trump and Sen. Vance. I thought the democrats were staunchly against any foreign interference in the election.
https://americanmilitarynews.com/2024/09/pics-biden-harris-admin-flies-zelensky-into-swing-state-on-us-air-force-jet/