Y'know, there ought to be a law prohibiting a sitting US Senator from openly interfering with the operations of a foreign government.

There also ought to be a law prohibiting a sitting US Senator from using agencies of a foreign government (yes---a law can be deemed an agency) to interfere with the operations of the United States government.

The United States government was [NOT] designed to function this way, and it quite obviously can't.

There, fixed it for you.

I see the problem, from a GOP perspective. Sen. Franken says that the reason to stop abusing the filibuster is to "help government function the way it's supposed to," and to "reassure Americans that government really does work for them." Both these concepts- government functioning properly, and that government should work for the common American- are anathema to the current-day- I could hardly call it "modern"- GOP.

-Z

Yeah, I'm looking forward to President Franken someday. :)

"That's nuts!"

And it's about time somebody said so. Thanks, Al.

Who knows, perhaps the 2010s will be the 'Al Franken Decade.' :)

-Z

Sen. Franken hits the nail on the head: the minority is routinely using the filibuster to slow the progress of the majority. That's why I think that Sen. Harkin's proposed solution won't fix the problem -- it will make it only less bad for a given bill.

I keep coming back to making the filibuster punitive for both the senator filibustering and all the supporting senators. Time was, the filibuster itself was phyically punishing. These days, the punishment can take the form of docked seniority or suspension of pay for the senator's staff or any number of other things.

Leave the ability to filibuster but make it sufficiently painful to use, and it will go back to being reserved for "matters of great principle."

Recess appointments, recess appointments, recess appointments!

Dems NEVER blocked any Bush nominees, did they?

The rules of the Senate are going to change DRASTICALLY as soon as the Republicans gain control.

I don't know how the Democrats are supposed to treat the mess. Do they change the rules in the next Congress and get all the blame for it? Or do they wait until the Republicans have 51 votes and then just roll over and play dead.

It seems like it a heads we lose, tails you win kind of decision.

The inflamed rhetoric that depended on forever linking senator Franken to his work in television as demeaning to the dignity of sensible Americans , somehow escapes the frozen posture of fear mongering among the hysterical wise people of the balanced and fair Michelle Bachman , Cheney , wing of political philosophy .
It may be time for these gifted solons to remind us once again just what is insulting to the intelligence of the proud American spirit .

"Dems NEVER blocked any Bush nominees, did they?"

You don't want to know the score of that game.

"Recess appointments, recess appointments, recess appointments!"

And there's a recess coming up...

I keep asking my sister in Minnesota if we can borrow one of her senators -- either one -- for just a few months, and she keeps saying no.

Well, that's a breath of fresh air from Warner. Just last week I got an email from him about how people out there who are hurting don't care about things like the filibuster, they want less partisanship and more bipartisan action on jobs.

Maybe my sternly worded response actually had some effect... (Yeah, it was me; I'm claiming all the credit.)

Bunning... again? I realize our House of Lords would never be able to get enough votes amongst themselves to pass it, but somebody up there ought to introduce a bill specifiying some kind of punishment for this kind of nonsense. This isn't principled opposition, it's just gumming up the works out of spite. Fine and censure this old goat and throw his ass out. (I know, I know... wishful thinking, but still.)

"Dems NEVER blocked any Bush nominees, did they?"
Posted by: macrobiotics_lite on March 16, 2010 at 2:29 PM

Only a Sith deals in absolutes.
The assumption underlying the question ("NEVER blocked any") requires defining the world in only the blackest of blacks and the starkest white, with no greys at all. In such terms, jaywalking becomes equivalent to mass murder -- and vice versa. Only a young child, an exceptionally stupid adult, or a deliberate liar, thinks in such terms.
Which of those are you, macro-lite?

I am Grover Norquist and I endorse destroying the federal government!

How many times do we have to tell you idiots that our objective IS to destroy the federal government's ability to regulate business and fund working and poor people?

I am quite proud of our mottos:
- More is never enough!
- I've got mine, fuck you!

smartalek is right on the absolutes.

The American Constitution Society just had a discussion on the filibuster. During the Q&A, someone pointed out that attempted filibusters during the Bush Administration generally had a point, not akin to the 94-2 matter. This includes where some Republican senators opposed the nominee.

The Republican on the panel had a trump: Miguel Estrada! What was the basis of that but mere partisanship? Also, someone obscure example was cited. The point that as a whole the question pointed out to the difference was ignored, the forest missed for a couple trees.

This is b.s. in action.

At some point, when a bully keeps beating you up and you have ample means to defend yourself and you don't, pointing out the other guy is a bully gets lame. The GOP is doing this to this administration because 1) its their job and 2) because Obama and the Democrats let them. I think the Democrats believe, wrongly I may add, that the public is going to say shame on those awful Republicans. Let me give you a hint, people are saying I can't believe I voted for those cowardly Dems. If you can't govern effectively with 58-59 Senators you can't govern at all. Either use the recess appointment process or stop whining.

Still confused about this. This is similar to an earlier post about a different delayed appointment, where cloture was filed and passed 99-0; Steve characterized the delay as a Republican filibuster. I asked then, and didn't get an answer -- where's the filibuster? At what point was a cloture motion filed and defeated?

Here, you have Bunning somehow preventing the entire rest of the Senate from a vote. How? I really just don't understand the process here, and the post doesn't explain how he's able to do this. Why doesn't Reid file for cloture?

Elmo, how many filibusters can be voted on during a year? Each takes 30 hours to ripen, so there is a hard limit.

If every motion and nominee needed a cloture vote, the Senate would be even more of a morass than it is now. So you can complain about each individual tree not being so hard to cut down, but it's the forest we're talking about.

Mobius, thanks for the comment. I'm still confused, but less so, I think. Maybe I just don't know enough about Senate procedures. I know cloture isn't immediate, but can only one cloture motion be pending at a time? In other words, Reid can file ten cloture motions at once, can't he, and let the 30 hour "ripening" process go forward concurrently, instead of sequentially?

I guess I'm just confused about the practice of calling it a "filibuster," when it sounds to me like what Bunning is actually doing is refusing a request for unanimous consent.

Let me give you a hint, people are saying I can't believe I voted for those cowardly Dems. If you can't govern effectively with 58-59 Senators you can't govern at all. Either use the recess appointment process or stop whining.
Posted by: aline

they ARE using recess appointments. that's not the point. the point is that the system is broken when recess appointments become the norm to circumvent holds on routine appointments. let's see if we can sum up the problem this way:

basically senator crackpot, r-ky, is holding up an appointment to a position nobody ever heard of to protest the decision by a foreign government to limit our ability to export carcinogens. does that sound sensible in any way?

I think aline is correct. Fairly or unfairly, in the weird macho rules that define our culture, Democrats are perceived as wimps, chickens, limp-wristed people who aren't really "tough" enough in a "fight." Taking the higher ground effectively cedes the low ground to those functioning with a lowest common denominator agenda of deceit, fear, and shallow authoritarian images. We should stop being "nice," especially with a walking anuses like Bunning.

Yeah, I'm looking forward to President Franken someday. :) - scrappled @ 14:17

Only after Obamas second term. Ah, that was a nice break. OK, time to wake up and face the music.

Change the fing rules.

I'm thinking of cheating on Anthony Weiner with Al Franken. Maybe just a long weekend in Minneapolis.

We need a marketing ploy for this guy.

Big beer mugs with Al's face on the side, and a hinged lid on top that looks like the Capitol Dome.

We'll call it "the Franken-stein."

Hey---I'd buy a few of 'em; it could be a great fundraising bit....

The United States government wasn't designed to function this way, and it quite obviously can't.

this is completely incorrect. The Senate was designed for 2 and only 2 purposes:

1) to get low population states to sign the Constitution - a role completed more than 200 years ago.

2) to make sure the rich could foil democracy by preventing the masses from running the country and getting what they wanted - which is EXACTLY the successful role the Senate is performing today (WITH the full cooperation and intent of democrats).

fantasized nostalgia of the Senate as some high minded serious institution of democracy is pure bunk! In performing its function as preserver of wealth and power for the wealthy and powerful, originally Senators weren't even elected - they were SELECTED by the state legislators... and we all know who they were (hint: the landed gentry).

In addition to getting low-population states to accept the Constitution, the Senate was also set up to give the slave states exactly half the seats even though they were well less than half the people, all the way up to 1850 or so.

At some point the Republic is going to collapse, and nothing will be done about it because the Senate won't be able to get unanimous consent to blow its nose.

shortstop: "I'm thinking of cheating on Anthony Weiner with Al Franken. Maybe just a long weekend in Minneapolis."

yup, Franken/Weiner, 2016

;-}}

One again, your articles is very good.thank you!very much.