E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSSIn a clash on the Senate floor Monday, Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell said that Majority Leader Harry Reid’s planned move to change the Senate filibuster rule could jeopardize chances of reaching a deal on avoiding tax hikes and spending cuts at the end of the year.
“We have huge issues before us here at the end of the year, much of which will probably carry over into next year,” McConnell said in a debate with Reid that lasted nearly 30 minutes. “It’s a time that we ought to building collegiality and relationships and not making incendiary moves that are damaging to the institution and could have serious ramifications on our ability to work together here at the end of the year.”
NBC's Domenico Montanaro reports that although some Republicans have changed their tone on a new-no-taxes pledge, they aren't putting tax rate increases on the table.
The filibuster is the Senate tradition of unlimited debate on bills and nominations. Under current rules, a filibuster can be ended only by a vote of three-fifths of all senators, or 60 senators.
Reid said he’s not proposing that the Senate do away entirely with the filibuster, “just that we do away with filibusters on motions to proceed,” the procedural step that precedes a final debate on a bill or a nomination.
Toby Jorrin / AFP - Getty Images
Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY), accompanied by Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV), speaks at the White House after meeting with US President Barack Obama on November 16, 2012 in Washington,DC.
Reid called his proposed rule change “minor” and an attempt to make the Senate “more efficient” – but McConnell vehemently disputed that. “This is no small matter, this is a big issue about the future of this country and how this institution ought to be operated,” the Kentucky Republican said.
McConnell accused his Democratic counterpart of intending to “break the rules of the Senate in order to change the rules of the Senate.”
He pointed out that under the current Senate rules it takes 67 senators to enact a rule change.
Andrea Mitchell talks to Sen. Bob Corker, R-Tenn., one of the Republican lawmakers breaking with the pledge to oppose all tax increases.
But Reid may move in January as soon as the Senate convenes for the new session of Congress to change the rules by a simple majority vote.
McConnell said Reid had used his power under the Senate rules to prevent Republican senators from offering amendments on proposed bills.
“He alone, out of 100 of us, gets to decide who gets to offer an amendment,” McConnell complained. “In other words he gets to pick our amendments for us.”
Therefore, McConnell said, the Republicans had responded by slowing or blocking debate through filibusters.
If Reid wants to defeat filibusters, McConnell suggested, he should “use the fatigue factor to grind down opposition” by forcing senators who were filibustering motions or bills to stay on the Senate floor and keep speaking.
But Reid said that “to the average American, these reforms are just common sense… America believes Congress is broken. Once again the only ones who disagree are Mitch McConnell and Republicans in Congress.”
He added later, “As I’ve traveled this country, people said, ‘Do something to change the Senate so we can get things done.’”
Leave a Comment:
Reading most of the posts...wow how narrow people think. Based on most of the remarks one could determine that the best way to end this disgust between both sides is to do away with all parties except for the democratic party. Then we simply have different members with coalitions have their candidate's under one and only one party. Next we do away completely with all politicians being able to filibuster. Hey it (doesn't) work in Russia. Again this was designed far long before any of the young rascals who fight each other on this web were even a thought or that maybe even your grandparents were. What were the original designers of the constitution with three levels of government thinking. My, the best answer is whatever the majority is at the time, let them decide our fate....O.K. I will work on being good with that. Until then, look where the filibuster came from, which party has used it more and in more divisive ways, and let these "goons" who you all elected take care of business, because...Earth to complainers...they will make the decision...no matter what you all complain about. You elected them so live with them. Oh I'm not a Repub or Dem but boy have these idiots including Reed and Graham sure screwed things up. When your getting fat..the best way to check this out when in denial is to ask someone else. So when your politician is an a--hole, best way to check this out is not to ask what he thinks of himself. Surely Reed will not tell you how great he is....but can someone please get the man to at least pay his taxes!
Face it we have elected a butch of worthless lairs and cheats into office on both sides. Until they start being held accountable nothing will improve.
They write their own pay increases and benefits, they write the tax code then get caught not paying taxes and keep their job. If Obamacare is so darn great then why is the government not included?. If it was your job to create a budget and it has not happened for 4 years would you expect to still have a job? That is just elected government employees what about the ones having get away parties for their agencies costing over half a million dollars and those earning 6 figure incomes while Bernie and his buddies crashed Wall Street and Banking, the lack of border protection now impacts our elections Etc...
Far from rich but we need to stop paying people for over spending and poor preformance so anything that stops the spending sounds good to me.
You can be certain that if Reid was in the Minority he would not a rule change.
Of course, the MSM and MSNBC crowd will agree with him.
At least another independent can't be fooled by the politician waving a welfare check or "goodies".
same old over and over and over...we cant tax the rich..says who
elvis payne,
Define rich and exactly how much should 'they' be taxed.
And are you one of them? Do you want your taxes raised and exactly how much? Or just someone's taxes raised?
12 years of tax breaks...yeah republicans...the government is spending more then they have...get it
Your 16 trillion dollor deficit (and Mine) was not created by tax breaks. But your remark shows how much you don't know about the process. Look at the facts and just how much of a deficit we started with when "mr. Big Ears" got into office. Again ...I'm not a repub or dem...but so many of you just shoot your words on a post because you have no responsibility to back it. Empty words. Do a little research ...lizard t-rd
hey dumb azz..2 wars on a credit card...and a tax break to boot yes from Bush...wow your an intelligent dumb azz
oh and when the economy began to fail yes big ears..bailed the banks out...that's why we are in doo doo...so you rich bastard you pay for your war..
How can anyone in their right mind claim that the tax cuts haven't affected the deficit? Anyone claiming such does so at the risk of their credibility. It is just plain nonsense.
Just do it Reid.
Don't trust the republicans. We watched them for 4 years filibuster the Government to a virtual standstill, but now they want to compromise and play nice. Do not trust them. They will do the same thing for another 4 years if you give them the chance.
Don't let McConnell threaten you Senator Reid. The nation is on YOUR side on the fiscal cliff and taxes issue even if you change the filibuster rules. The R party has been abusing the filibuster for years. Tighten it up. The "stupid"... yes "STUPID" Republican party reminds me of the knight in "Monty Python's Holy Grail" that has no arms and no legs yet keeps yelling "come back and fight me like a man". It would be laughable if it weren't so pathetic.
Wow, I think we have found were our American Universities have failed. We should begin showing Monte Python movie's so you can get your degree. Such disgust , yet such simple, shallow, anger...Good training from school today I see.
hey Chief you like your name..he nailed your name..to what you are
12 years of tax breaks...yeah republicans...the government is spending more then they have...get it
do it Reid..get those taxes from the rich
Yes!!! Raise taxes but on someone else! And you forget that nearly everyone had their federal income taxes decrease due to the Bush tax cuts. Even many of those who paid no federal income taxes before now have a negative tax liability (they call it refundable tax credits and you get a refund of money you did not pay!). Even the left knows those "tax breaks for the wealthy" did not go only to the wealthy. This is one reason they will fight to the death to allow them to expire only on "the wealthy". If they went primarily to the wealthy (as you believe), allowing them ALL to expire would not harm the nonwealthy!!! The CBO says that about $80B/yr went to the top 2%. The total was about $380B/yr. So you see, this idea that they went only to the wealthy was another tool used by the left to foster class warfare. It won the election for them because so many are just like you. They will believe anything except that they are personally responsible for their failures, not "the wealthy"! That is what defines a bottom feeder.
beans and rice..i will eat before you get another damn tax break
so get rid of filibuster then realize when you become the minority at some point that maybe it wasn't a good idea in the first place...as much as we all blast the process it was put in place to ensure the minority does not get steam rolled..so careful what you ask for
I like it the way it is your right
give the rich tea nuts what they want...another 12 years of tax breaks....then kiss your benefits by
sorry go back to school
Just do this! Make the filibuster harder to use. The Republicans have been way too obstructionist that we need to take their "toys" away. I hope Reid holds to this promise!
there are very good reasons why you would want to change the senate rules only reluctantly ----- eventually, the pendulum swings the other way, and then you may regret those changes.
well.... what is the truth of this senate rule change policy ??? ---- is it simple majority, or 67% ???
As per the constitution, the only time a 'super majority' of 2/3 (or 67 votes if all members are present) is required is to override a presidential veto of a bill. This 'rule' that they're talking about is something that was put in place in 1975, and requires a 3/5 majority (60 votes) to stop one particular type of filibuster.
One thing that most posters have lost sight of is the fact that the design of congress is what's supposed to protect the 'minority'. Each state has two senators, even if they only have one representative (like Montana, Wyoming, Alaska, etc). So the less-populous states have equal power in the senate; granting the minority more power by requiring more than a simple majority vote is in direct opposition to what the founding fathers put into place. Seems all the RW blathering about the constitution doesn't apply here....
i guess i'll have to go back and read that part of the constitution that deals with senate rules ---- don't remember that from back when i was in college. ----- and without a link, i'm not inclined to take your word for it.
(CNSNews.com) - The U.S. Treasury increased the net debt of the United States $24,327,048,384.38 on the day after Thanksgiving, which equals approximately $211.69 for each of the nation's 114,916,000 households.
At the close of business last Wednesday, according to the Treasury, the national debt was $16,283,161,895,179.85. On Thanksgiving, the Treasury took the day off and did no borrowing. But on Friday, the Treasury increased the debt of the United States to $16,307,488,943,564.23. That was a one-day increase of $24,327,048,384.38.
The Census Bureau estimated that as of September there were approximately 114,916,000 households in the United States. So, the $24,327,048,384.38 that the Treasury borrowed on Friday equaled about $211.69 per household.
Friday was also the first time in the history of the United States that the debt has topped $16.3 trillion.
When President Barack Obama first took office on Jan. 20, 2009, the national debt stood at $10,626,877,048,913.08. Since then, it has increased by $5,680,611,894,651.15.
That means that since Obama has been president, the national debt has increased by about $49,432.73 per household.
let me help you with some edumucation
hey dumb azz..2 wars on a credit card...and a tax break to boot yes from Bush...wow your an intelligent dumb azz
#55.2 - Mon Nov 26, 2012 7:03 PM CST
elvis payne
oh and when the economy began to fail yes big ears..bailed the banks out...that's why we are in doo doo...so you rich bastard you pay for your war..
Don't forget it was the deregulation of the banking industry by Republican Phil Graham, that allowed the economy to tank in the first place! Blaming a president who inherits a travesty does not mean he is responsible for spending the money to fix the problem! Perhaps some forethought would have been wise by the greedy bankers, or their faithful Republican Monkeys!
Should we also forget, herr Republican, that the proposed Republican bail-out was about the same size as Obama's?
Should we just blame whoever is in the White House for the sins of the House of Representatives to pass a budget?
The people spoke! Republicans lost! Yet we still hear the psycho-babble escaping from their lips! What is wrong with them? Lack of oxygen in the Republican Bubble? Were they really brainwashed by the likes of Rush Limbaugh and Karl Rove and Fox Entertainment News?
Perhaps change was inevitable. Stupidity can only exist as long as the bubble reflects light inward, but more Americans are now on the outside, looking in!
THANK YOU...THANKYOU....THANK YOU...
Unfortunate about this is that if your on the receiving end...you could care less about what the national debt means to your or your children.
jack nailed it chief
You mean the one that Bill Clinton signed into law?
The bill in question is the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act, which was passed in 1999 and repealed portions of the Glass-Steagall Act, a piece of legislation from the era of the Great Depression that imposed a number of regulations on financial institutions. It's true that Gramm authored the act, but what became law was a widely accepted bipartisan compromise. The measure passed the House 362 - 57, with 155 Democrats voting for the bill. The Senate passed the bill by a vote of 90 - 8. Among the Democrats voting for the bill: Obama's running mate, Joe Biden. The bill was signed into law by President Clinton, a Democrat. If this bill really had "stripped the safeguards that would have protected us," then both parties share the blame, not just "John McCain's friend."
nomoretax -----------yeah ----- but that's an inconvenient truth for some people.
Yeah, they are both to blame. But the Dems unfortunely bought into the GOP sell-job about how this would help all americans, but wall street used it to enrich themselves at the expense of everybody else. Won't be fooled again.....
Elvis, actually I think "nomoretaxes" got close rot the target...both parties have payed the American voters as fool's. They both share the responsibility! But it sounds like more people are thinking. By the way the facts with no more taxes are dead on. I just looked them up.
The fiscal cliff works to the benefit of Democrats and the Republicans know it. Frankly, lets go over the cliff. It will cut the overblown defense budget, it leaves Medicare and Social Security in tact. The Democrats would then propose a tax cut for 98% of taxpayers (below 98%) and then watch the Republicans vote against it just to protect the other 2%. We put the Bush tax cuts to bed forever. You can kiss tax reform goodbye and no one will ever have the guts to cut taxes again.
It's a loose, loose, loose proposition for the Republicans. They will get the blame for going over the cliff and they will get the blame for not taking Obama's offer in 2011 which was a better deal for them. You make your bed, you pick your territory, and you live with the consequences. The Republicans bet and lost!
lets do it
Just a few short years ago when the Dems where the minority, they screamed because the Reps wanted to change the rules... Hypocrites.
The Democrats weren't abusing the filibuster - in fact they weren't even using it enough. Republicans have abused the filibuster during the last 4 years.
Thanks Jon...proud to be a Christian also..but check your facts?
Go ahead and tax the rich some more...it won't do any good because our president is not going to stop spending money that we don't have. Until we get control of the spending..taxes won't matter.
hey dumb azz..2 wars on a credit card...and a tax break to boot yes from Bush...wow your an intelligent dumb azz
#55.2 - Mon Nov 26, 2012 7:03 PM CST
elvis payne
oh and when the economy began to fail yes big ears..bailed the banks out...that's why we are in doo doo...so you rich bastard you pay for your war..
mcbeef ---- true
You right...McBeef..but when the revenue is not generated...I guess they can't use that one any more!
you want me to eat beans and rice..you dumb azz..tea nuts...I'm ready..I have balls
The best thing Harry Reid could do to fix Congress is to resign from the Senate and go home. He' one of the biggest problems this country has.
Any rep in office for more than eight years should be sent packing. Public drain.
Rick perry for life..Texas way...yeah right huh
Let's call "taxing the rich" what it really is a small block of voters who have too few votes to care about. They can't hurt a re-election bid. Corporation don't vote let's go after them. There you have it rich people and corporations not a enough votes to hurt a re-election bid. Sad because the people go along with it.
everyone likes an idea until it hurts them directly.
McConnell is afraid that he'll have to work when he blocks bills and appointments, as opposed to being able to do lunch the way he does today. And this is not the nuclear (nuklar as GWB would put it) option. This is simple reform that would at least allow each bill an up or down vote. McConnell must be afraid of something.
no more tax breaks...beans and rice it is you rich bastard Hannity
Last count...mornihng joe and Rachel Maddow make more than Hannity. You must not like the hair.
Morning Joe is an educated ex member of congress, Rachel Maddow holds a degree in public policy and a PHD in political science, Hannity is an uneducated drop out, and it shows. He should be thanking his lucky stars he's got what he does because his qualifications say he should be marching with the protesting employees of Walmart.
So all Republicans will have to do to filibuster a bill is actually get up and speak for hours and hours and hours and hours? What happens if those old guys fall asleep at the podium?
Then they are done. Filibuster over.
B707...that's great...but don't you see what's right and wrong.....yeah ..lets just keep on spending money we don't have...as long as it makes the republicans look bad that's okay....
Yeah cause Republicans have shown SOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO much fiscal restraint when they're in power.
just because both parties are guilty, does not make it a good idea to continue that practice... ------ believe it or not, there are a few unaffiliated voters in this country who would like to see a reduction in spending.
Hello JFix...the Democrats control the Prez, The senate and at last decision...the Supreme court. soooooo.... please try to throw the "fiscal constrain" where is should stick. With dems. Again another uneducated little thinker here on the post. And...again please. not a repub,dem,or teapartier. but watching all of you screw the county up!
Yeah Chief, you're the supreme intelligence on here right? Just cause I'm not so blind as to think that putting Republicans in charge would mean we'd stop spending doesn't make me a little thinker, it makes me a realist. I never said that I was against reduced spending. You and ronpal just assume that. That makes you the little thinker here, not me. In addition, just because you "lost" the Obamacare decision doesn't mean the Court is a "liberal" one. Talk about uneducated.
jfix ----- i guess you didn't read the article about obamacare today ---- apparently that fight is not quite over.
The individual mandate portion of the fight is totally over. The employer mandate might not be but more than likely the 4th circuit will rule in favor of the mandate, they'll appeal to the Supreme Court and the Court will most likely not hear the case. But hey crazier things have happened. The individual mandate isn't going anywhere. To quote John Boehner... it's "the law of the land".
the supreme court today said they will hear cases related to particular employers. ------ as far as the mandate goes, i suggest you read page 131 of that law ---- then perhaps you will understand why it will fail as currently written. ----- i am not against obamacare in totality, but it was poorly written, and will need modification to survive.
Again....Jfix, I am no supreme intelligence. But thanks for the compliment. Your post is like the dam with too much water. When it overflows water goes everywhere....no control. I never have made the comment to put Repubs in charge...again read all posts before sticking foot up azz and then in mouth...I'm not repub, dem or tea...and not Ron Pal ( but there is never a question of where he stands on an issue)..keep guessing... Oh by the way.. I do support a different type of national health care, but not a four thousand page document that even the folk s who voted on it (guess what party) never read. Do your research, then maybe you can discuss with depth and not speculation.
No, the Supreme Court said that they're telling the 4th Circuit to rehear Liberty University's challenge to the employer mandate. The Supreme Court isn't doing anything with it until it is appealed by whichever side loses. Then like I said, they'll probably just refuse to do anything with it. But again, crazier things have happened.
Well Chief, before you go calling someone an uneducated little thinker, you should read what people post. I never said you said that you were in favor of having Republicans in charge. You need some help with reading comprehension. You missed those days in school.
Wow ..I think I agree with you on the issue with the supreme court with Libery University, yet your comment with repubs in charge was a little incusive to pull me in. Your making headway.
what's interesting about what the supreme court said, is that it re-opens the whole idea of obamacare conflicting with something already mentioned in the constitution ---- freedom of religion. ------------ and..... i take it you declined to read page 131 ---- might want to write down the page number, for future reference.
Whatever you need to throw all your hope into ronpal..... don't be surprised when at the end of the day, Obamacare is still standing. It's not my favorite thing in the world but it's not going anywhere. The Justice Department didn't even care enough about this to oppose it.
“As I’ve traveled this country, people said, ‘Do something to change the Senate so we can get things done.’”
Harry, the best thing you can do is stop wasting time making sound bites and start working on the problems. Start by cutting back on the current give away programs, don't champion any new give away programs, and in general start spending our money more responsibility. If that is beyond your abilities, go home, and take Nancy with you on your way out
Thanks Mike...probably the most profound and intelligent statemtn made so far. Simple, accurate and to the point!
Media hype -- neither party is going to let in happen