Thursday, January 24, 2013

Fixing the Filibusters

The Senate has passed bipartisan filibuster reforms with overwhelming majorities on both measures.

As it stands, filibusters, used to delay votes on legislation, cannot be stopped unless there is a 60 vote majority (out of 100).  Democrats have long accused Republicans of overusing the power to prevent real change.

The measures passed today were created as a compromise between the Democrats and Republicans. The Republicans would use fewer filibusters, while the Democrats would allow amendments by the Republican party to bills they discuss. The Republicans have also long accused Democrats of preventing them from making any changes to bills.

The first measure reduces the amount of times a filibuster can be used by a minority party. The 60 vote requirement to end a filibuster shall remain as is.



The second measure of the proposal states that the minority party will be allowed 2 amendments to all legislation. The minor catch is that if the amendment is not relevant to the legislation, it will require 60 votes in order to pass.

These changes came about amidst threats of Senator Harry Reid's "nuclear option" as it has been dubbed by Senate Republicans. The "nuclear option" would've been a process by which Senate rules are changed through a vote of just 51 people instead of 67.

Although this isn't extensive legislation to entirely change the filibuster culture of the Senate, it is a step forward in breaking the gridlock between both parties. With the passing of this new proposal, both sides have incentive to work through legislation instead of slowing it down in order to stall.

Read more about what happened today here, here, here, and here.

So what do you guys think? How much effect will this really have on the Senate? Is this the start of something new? 

1 comment:

Anonymous said...

I think this proposal is an interesting idea, but I'm not sure whether it will make positive changes in the Senate or not... Since the compromise allows the minority (Republicans) to make two amendments to all legislation, I can just envision the headlines of uproar amongst liberal communities everywhere if it gets out of hand. I suppose the effects of gridlock may start wear off because of this, but I still don't see this option as being a plan that will really make the senate work together. In a sense, I feel it makes the two main parties even more separated, and it may pit them against each other to a greater extent.