11/21/2013 22:21kruijs

Washington entered a new era on Thursday when the Senate voted to invoke the “nuclear option,” a technical change to an existing chamber rule that is sure to worsen the acrimony and further the divide between Democrats and Republicans on Capitol Hill.

It’s known as the “nuclear option” because of the broad and serious implications of its deployment. It calls to mind the Cold War, when a nuclear strike by the United States or Soviet Union against the other would all but result in mutually-assured destruction.

The move, which overturned the requirement for a 60-vote majority for most presidential nominees, is an unprecedented power play by Democrats, and one that is sure to reverberate in both the long and short term.

Mark Halperin and John Heilemann explain what forced Sen. Harry Reid to take this step and how it may hurt the Democrats.
Advertise | AdChoices

Republicans warned before the vote that the GOP will retaliate should they re-take the majority.

http://nbcpolitics.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/11/21/21565136-democrats-drop-the-nuclear-bomb-so-what-happens-next?lite

   01/15/2013 07:30kruijs

We must begin to reward senators belonging to the minority who maintain the ability to compromise, even if they are few. There are currently no proposals that suggest the complete elimination of the filibuster, so even if reform is enacted, Democrats are still going to have to work with Republicans, even if only to achieve a successful cloture vote.

Therefore, reformers cannot burn bridges as they would with the nuclear option. Breaking a filibuster can be a matter of persuading only one or two senators. With Democrats on the brink of a 55-vote control of the 113th Senate, only five Republican votes are necessary.

Perhaps refusing to use the nuclear option would lead to the political capital necessary to persuade these Republicans and set a precedent of compromise and cooperation.

http://www.salon.com/2013/01/08/the_nuclear_option_for_filibuster_reform_is_no_option_at_all/

   12/17/2012 16:14kruijs

Advocates of what's come to be called the "talking filibuster" are closing in on the majority needed to reform the rules, according to a whip count compiled by The Huffington Post, based on interviews with Democratic senators and with reform advocates who have spoken with senators. Cross-checking the list with prior voting records and public statements indicates that Democrats could lock up as many as 52 votes by this week, when they are expected to introduce a rules reform package to be voted on in the new year.

Before Democrats vote on the talking filibuster or any other rules reforms, they would first have to vote to change the rules with fewer than two-thirds of the chamber in support -- what proponents call the "constitutional option" and what critics call the "nuclear option."

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/12/17/senate-filibuster-reform_n_2313233.html

   12/17/2012 16:13kruijs

Advocates of what's come to be called the "talking filibuster" are closing in on the majority needed to reform the rules, according to a whip count compiled by The Huffington Post, based on interviews with Democratic senators and with reform advocates who have spoken with senators. Cross-checking the list with prior voting records and public statements indicates that Democrats could lock up as many as 52 votes by this week, when they are expected to introduce a rules reform package to be voted on in the new year.

Before Democrats vote on the talking filibuster or any other rules reforms, they would first have to vote to change the rules with fewer than two-thirds of the chamber in support -- what proponents call the "constitutional option" and what critics call the "nuclear option."

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/12/17/senate-filibuster-reform_n_2313233.html

   11/28/2012 21:20kruijs

Majority Leader Harry Reid’s push for filibuster reform won backing from President Obama Wednesday. “[Americans] want to see progress, not partisan delay games,” White House Communications Director Dan Pfeiffer said in a statement to The Huffington Post. “The President supports Senator Reid’s efforts to reform the filibuster process.”

http://tv.msnbc.com/2012/11/28/obama-backs-filibuster-reform-but-what-impact-would-it-have/

   11/13/2012 06:28kruijs

I intended to have three options:
- Reform (or attempted reform) using the nuclear option
- Reform (or attempted reform) using any other procedures
- no attempt to reform at all
where "reform" may be any kind of filibuster reform, including completely abolishing it, or even just any slight modification at all

   11/12/2012 23:31Knurled

Does "No Reform Proposed" need to be re-worded to something like "No Reform Passes"? It doesn't appear that there's any prediction for "no change to Senate filibuster rules in January 2013".

   11/12/2012 13:07kruijs

Make no mistake about it. This new talk about “Filibuster Reform” coming from Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) is nothing more than a power grab by liberals in the Senate.

Reid has stifled debate during his rule, and he will use the pre-text of “Filibuster Reform” to bully and squelch the minority party, much like he has done for the past few years.

Reid showed his true motivations when argued that he will continue to prevent votes on “same-sex marriage and abortion” because “I mean, the American people aren’t interested in that.” This is further evidence that reforming the Senate’s rules is merely a means to stop difficult votes for the majority party on revenue-neutral tax reform, gun rights, entitlement reform and traditional family values.

http://townhall.com/columnists/briandarling/2012/11/12/filibuster_reform_is_power_grab_by_harry_reid