Forget Reconciliation, Force a Traditional Filibuster or Use The Nuclear Option

[berni_mccoy]

The Senate has two options besides Reconciliation to end or bypass a Filibuster.

The Republicans can filibuster the Healthcare Bill using a procedural filibuster, meaning, they don't actually have to do anything but say they are filibustering. However, under Senate Rule 22, the Majority Leader has the authority to force a traditional filibuster, meaning that the Republicans must have a quorum and must speak for 24/7. Furthermore, the Majority Leader has the power to put nothing else on the agenda, meaning that until the filibuster ends, no other legislature will be considered. This would force the Repubs into non-stop marathon of speaking and it is a tactic that was used to break the filibuster that was blocking the Civil Rights Act (see: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Filibuster ).

The Democrats have another option, one that was threatened against them: The Nuclear Option. Basically, with a simple majority (in this case 50 senators, since the V.P. breaks ties), the majority can deny the filibuster with a simple point of order. Here's how it would work. From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_option :

The Nuclear Option is used in response to a filibuster or other dilatory tactic. A senator makes a point of order calling for an immediate vote on the measure before the body, outlining what circumstances allow for this. The presiding officer of the Senate, usually the vice president of the United States or the president pro tempore, makes a parliamentary ruling upholding the senator's point of order. The Constitution is cited at this point, since otherwise the presiding officer is bound by precedent. A supporter of the filibuster may challenge the ruling by asking, "Is the decision of the Chair to stand as the judgment of the Senate?" This is referred to as "appealing from the Chair." An opponent of the filibuster will then move to table the appeal. As tabling is non-debatable, a vote is held immediately. A simple majority decides the issue. If the appeal is successfully tabled, then the presiding officer's ruling that the filibuster is unconstitutional is thereby upheld. Thus a simple majority is able to cut off debate, and the Senate moves to a vote on the substantive issue under consideration. The effect of the nuclear option is not limited to the single question under consideration, as it would be in a cloture vote. Rather, the nuclear option effects a change in the operational rules of the Senate, so that the filibuster or dilatory tactic would thereafter be barred by the new precedent.

That's right. The Nuclear Option changes the Senate Rules on-the-fly. And it's completely legal. If there ever was a time to use the Nuclear Option, it is now. Why? Because the Republicans have openly stated that they will do anything to prevent Universal Healthcare with a Public Option. They have never intended to negotiate. They've even stated they have not negotiated in good faith. The Senate owes it to the American People to pass this much needed legislation. Healthcare is not something for just those who can afford it. As we approach the anniversary of 9/11, let's consider that more than 3 times the people who died in 9/11 die every year because they can't afford health care. It is truly a matter of life and death. It's time to go all-in for the American People.

[Faryn Balyncd]

1. K&R....Make them stand up & use their CONDOM CATHETERS & actually filibuster...not just threaten to

Let's have no more of this "Didn't have the 'required' 61 votes" lie.

If the Republicans are going to filibuster, they need to pay the price and get the blame, and the bad PR.

The press has repeated this "61 vote 'requirement' " lie so many times in the last decade that younger Americans actually think it is true.

[Edweird]

5. The press? Hell, HALF OF DU repeated that bullshit at one time So many supported Lieberman

for just that reason - as if he wasn't some scumbag repuke. "we CAN'T revoke his chairmanship - he won't LIKE us..."

[Stinky The Clown]

2. K&R for substance and for the use of the word "dilatory".

Twice.

The quote used "dilatory" in two perfectly logical and contextually appropriate sentences.

Plus the substance of this.

[Edweird]

3. K&R - I know they CAN do it. The question is WILL they do it?

The r's have been ramming crappy legislation down our throats with a slim majority. There's no reason - short of a lack of WILL - that this isn't a sure thing. That's what makes this so infuriating.

[berni_mccoy]

4. Well, let's say this is a test for them then. Will they get massive grass roots support in 2010?

Only if they push through, at a minimum, a strong public option. Otherwise, I think they will not be able to muster the support for Democrats to come out and vote for them.

[Edweird]

6. I would rather see a mass of Democrats voting in 2010 - against incumbents

that chose not to support this. I want their choice to be political suicide.

[kenny blankenship]

7. Someone ate their Wheaties this morning!

I like it. We'd get to see if the Senate Dems REALLY think their idea of what constitutes health care reform is good enough to pass by suspension of usual Senate procedure. They might want to revisit a few points first before wedding themselves to this legislation and acknowledging paternity for the outcry that would follow. Repukes would accuse them of Leninist overthrow of the Republic. The new healthcare system would have to be VERY POPULAR to sustain the Democrats in power. And I think they know it wouldn't be.

[Edweird]

9. Look at the history of Medicare. r's said the same things THEN

that they are saying NOW about single payer or public option. But try and take their Medicare away. They are holding on to it with a kung-fu grip. It will be popular. Particularly if they go for broke and push single payer through (Medicare for ALL!).

But no matter what, the people screaming at the townhall meetings and spewing hate speech on the radio will NEVER like Democrats, no matter what. So who gives a shit what they think?

[JHB]

8. Yes, make them do it. Make them stand up and show themselves doing it.

For one thing, it will make crystal clear who the actual "obstructionists" are (for when they try to use that term against Dems again).

For another, I'm not sure they're physically up to the task. A couple of days and they'll start dropping like flies.

[Greyskye]

10. Yep. And as they were the ones who first invoked use of the 'nuclear option'...

...there will just be many more examples of the hypocrisy of the modern Republican party, as they decry the use of it to be "un-American". :eyes:

K&R

[berni_mccoy]

11. Exactly. How just would it be for a Republican conjured idea to come back and bite them in the ass?