Maher Rants Against Constitution, Founders: Filibuster Is ‘Silent Coup,’ Tiny States Don’t Deserve..

[Tx4obama]

VIDEO here: http://www.mediaite.com/tv/maher-rants-against-constitution-founders-filibuster-is-silent-coup-tiny-states-dont-deserve-two-senators/

Maher Rants Against Constitution, Founders: Filibuster Is ‘Silent Coup,’ Tiny States Don’t Deserve Two Senators

Regular viewers of Bill Maher‘s show are well aware that one of the issues that gets Maher most fired up is the equal apportionment of senators to each U.S. state. Amidst discussion of the Boston bombings and gun control tonight, Maher went on a small rant against the Constitution and how every state does not deserve the same number of senators. He found it ridiculous that a small state like Wyoming gets as many senators as a huge state like California.

The panel was discussing gun control and why it failed in the Senate this week. Maher found it ridiculous that background checks, something supported by 90 percent of the people, failed to pass the Senate. He slammed the filibuster as a “silent coup” but also went after the Constitutional designation of two senators per state.

-snip-

[Warpy]

1. he's right and that's why Jellyfish Reid needs to end it

The people of this country can't expect anything but a do nothing Congress that lets the mess get worse and worse until he does.

[abq e streeter]

2. Jellyfish Reid...

I don't know whether to or or both

[Boomerproud]

6. Both are appropriate when refering to Reid.

I don't do as much of the first as I do the second, however.

[1KansasDem]

3. Ending the filibuster now is a great idea

if you really believe republicans will never again control the senate with us in the minority.
Looking at 2014....I'm not so sure ending it now is a great idea.

[LonePirate]

4. Repubs will kill the filibuster if/when they ever regain control of the Senate

If they control the House as well, it will be occur almost immediately after Congress convenes.

[1KansasDem]

7. They had their chance

a few years ago. Threaten it, didn't do it. Knowing if they pulled the trigger they would not have filbuster protection if they ever returned to the minority.
I've got to believe that is what has kept Harry Reid from ending it to this point.
Once that lid comes off, I won't be put back on.

It will make whoever the minority party is, a whole lot weaker.

[CincyDem]

8. And their rationale to kill it will be...

...how the previous minority used it to hamper all legislative progress. The unfortunate realty of American is that half the population will agree with them and not realize that repubs were "the previous minority"

[LonePirate]

9. Exactly! They will frame it as reforming the Senate to make it more modern and productive

They will publicize how a simple majority is all that is needed to make the Senate reflect the will of the people. It is going to be a disgusting display of hypocrisy, propaganda and rewritten history all the while castigating Democrats as incompetent and unproductive.

[CincyDem]

11. Unfortunately

Castigating democrats as incompetent and unproductive will be an accurate description of our senate leadership.

I really dislike every element of their politics but they won't be wiring on this one.

[demcoat]

15. Sad but the problem I have with it

is that democrats dont use it enough. They are so soft that their wimpy arms can be easily twisted by the rethugs to do whatever evil shit they want. Filibuster will work better when both sides start using it again.

[Warpy]

5. I've proposed it this way before:

The filibuster should be ended in time of national emergency or when more than 30 bills and/or appointments are being filibustered. Once the emergency has resolved and there are fewer than 30 ongoing filibusters, it can be restored.

Yes, before Republicans started to abuse it, it was an important tool for a minority party to stop legislation that was repugnant to them. However, the Republicans are abusing it and I know the Democrats will do likewise if they retake the Senate.

The logjam that exists now must be broken. Both parties must be forced to do their jobs. My way does that while preserving it for use when men of good will once again occupy that chamber.

[patrice]

10. Agree.

[patrice]

12. Howard Zinn made a similar critique in A people's History of the United States. He said it was an

economic class based strategy to protect the government from ignorant "lower" classes who did not share the interests of propertied white males.

[madrchsod]

13. it seems this has worked for a long time now...

so every time one side loses we should change the way the senate works? we have the house where large and small states have different numbers of representatives that solves bill`s problem.

maybe bill should think before he speaks.

[jjewell]

14. As far as the filibuster is concerned...

Maher is right. The filibuster was never even an option considered by the Founders, nor a "rule" considered by the original Senate. The filibuster was "accidentally created" by the elimination of the then little used "move the previous question" rule.

Reid could and should have re-established the "move the previous question" rule.

There would be nothing stopping a GOP controlled Senate from re-adopting the filibuster if they were to regain a Senate majority.