History! Senate nixes filibusters on most presidential appointments!


They call it the “nuclear option,” and it’s detonation is long overdue.

The story is HERE:

The partisan battles that have paralyzed Washington in recent years took a historic turn Thursday, as Senate Democrats eliminated filibusters for most presidential nominations, severely curtailing the political leverage of the Republican minority in the Senate and assuring an escalation of partisan warfare.

Saying that “enough is enough,” President Obama welcomed the end of what he called the abuse of the Senate’s advise and consent function, which he said had turned into “a reckless and relentless tool” to grind the gears of government to a halt.

While “neither party has been blameless for these tactics,” Obama said in a statement to reporters at the White House, “today’s pattern of obstruction . . . just isn’t normal; it’s not what our founders envisioned.” He cited filibusters against executive branch appointments and judicial nominees on grounds that he said were based simply on opposition to “the policies that the American people voted for in the last election.”

“This isn’t obstruction on substance, on qualifications,” he said. “It’s just to gum up the works.”

The rule change means that federal judge nominees and executive-office appointments can be confirmed by a simple majority of senators, rather than the 60-vote supermajority that has been required for more than two centuries.

The change does not apply to Supreme Court nominations. But the vote, mostly along party lines, reverses nearly 225 years of precedent and dramatically alters the landscape for both Democratic and Republican presidents, especially if their own political party holds a majority of, but fewer than 60, Senate seats.

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) accused Democratsof a power grab and suggested that they will regret their decision if Republicans regain control of the chamber.

“We’re not interested in having a gun put to our head any longer,” McConnell said. “Some of us have been around here long enough to know that the shoe is sometimes on the other foot.” McConnell then addressed Democrats directly, saying: “You may regret this a lot sooner than you think.”



  1. thehereandnow1

    Odd that back in 2005 the Dems thought this was a terrible thing. In fact, a young junior senator from Illinois with dreams of golfing and hob-knobbing with rap stars stood on the floor of the senate and said the nuclear option was a bad thing, regardless of if it was the democrats or republicans. Though we should hardly be surprised, this is the same guy who 30 times (that we know of) told the American people that if they liked their doctor or health plan they could keep it, and we all know how that’s turning out.

    Anyone who thinks that this will only apply to judicial and cabinet appointments is smoking the same stuff that makes them think Obamacare’s a good thing. You know ol’ Harry Reid’s gonna extend to legislation. This is a given.

    But while all you libs are sitting there celebrating how good this is, remember this. Now you’ll only have yourselves to blame for the crappy legislation you sneak past with a simple majority. And more importantly, you will not retain power in the senate. In fact at this rate you’ll lose it next year. But whether it’s next year or an election after that, you will lose your majority. I’m guessing then you’ll be crying about how unfair it is. I look forward to Pat’s post-and-run / I’m too afraid to comment posts then about how the Republicans are using the oh-so-evil nuclear option.

  2. Even odder, anonymous bomb thrower, is how you totally neglect that the House changed their rules making it impossible for a democrat to EVER introduce a bill in the House of Representatives.

    What the Senate did was the long over due push back.

    If you don’t like it, too damn bad: Hard ball all the way, baby.

    • thehereandnow1

      But I suppose it was ok when the Dems were in control of the House?

      No no Del Wasso, not Hard ball at all. The super majority was in place in the Senate for decades. Back in the days of Tip O’Neil, JFK, heck even when Biden, Obama, and Clinton were senators, the super majority stayed. Obama and Biden are both on record on the Senate floor no less, saying how ending the super majority rule would be a mistake REGARDLESS of the party in charge (note Pat – capitalization used for emphasis). In fact, I’d bet whatever hard ball you enjoy playing with that if Pat was blogging back in 2005 he’d have posts ad nauseum about how the Republicans getting rid of the super majority would be bad for America. So why all of the sudden is it a good thing? The answer’s pretty clear, the president and the dems in the senate are such weak-skinned ineffective louts that they have to bend/change the rules to get their way. Similar to Obama using ‘executive action’ to try and cover his a$$ with regards to Obamacare.

      And with regards to your “…too damn bad” line, I hope you remember this when the Dems lose control of the Senate. They will, it’s not a case of if as it is when, history proves this. At the present rate we can very well be looking at a case where in 2017 there are Republican majorities in both the House and Senate, as well as a Republican president. And when that day comes, and they take advantage to what the dems have done now, and keep the simple majority, will you still be saying “Hard ball all the way, baby”? No, Del Wasso, I’m pretty sure you’ll be on here with Pat, calling it oppressive, saying it’s un-American, crying in your Al Gore endorsed eco-friendly pillows.

      To paraphrase that reverend whose church Obama went to for several years yet managed to not hear a word he said, your “chickens will come home to roost”.

  3. No one needs a history lesson, here, other than yourself, anonymous bomb thrower. I will address what I wrote since you flippantly disregarded what I had said:

    “The House changed their rules making it impossible for a democrat to EVER introduce a bill in the House of Representatives.

    What the Senate did was the long over due push back.”

    If all you can do to justify bad behavior is to point to someone else behaving – in you view – badly, we have nothing else to say to one another, and to be honest, that’s just how I like it.

    The radical right has been coddled for far too long.

    Back into the basement with all of you!

    • thehereandnow1

      “The radical right has been coddled for far too long”?????

      Seriously? He who lives in glass house should not throw rocks. The radical left has shown what it’s like to be coddled. News outlets backing them up, rarely questioning them, in fact even supporting and joining them. Actors, actresses, musicians who when they’re not busy drinking, getting high, or trying to figure out a way to bed a Kardashian make obnoxious claims and statements with the support and probable blessing of the media. From Kanye West proclaiming that Bush hated black people to Dan Rather trying to run with false reports and articles about Bush in an attempt to ruin the 2004 election, the left have shown time and time again that when it comes to the basement they own prime real estate.

      Nice try del whacko, but you’ve failed again. Run along to watch MSNBC for your next come-back.

  4. I’m very concerned about this action the Dems took. My gut feeling says the Dems will lose the presidency in 2016 and quite possibly the senate too. Then we’re going to see revenge taken to new levels by the republicans. And the left is going to have that helpless feeling we had during the Bush years when we were reminded often, if you’re not with us, you’re with the enemy. Who knew then that being a dem or progessive meant you were the enemy? That’s what it means now. It’s that divided and don’t think for a moment the Tea Party is going to lose its ability to influence decisions. They live to see the south rise again so to say.

    The Obamacare fiasco is becoming more and more burdensome to the democrats as they move into election season, and the republicans will use the failures of that system to their favor. We’re finding out more now about how badly this website development was handled.

    It’s beginning to look like the selection of the vendor(s) was done more so for political payback than it was because because they were the best vendor for the job. What I don’t understand though is how could the roll out of this program be so bungled in every state that did their own website too?

    How can American ingenuity have been so poorly implemented when we have software companies rolling out products that handle similar volumes of activity with no problems? Do we have rookies running our government? And let’s not forget that the people in charge of implementing Obamacare had a successful model in place with the Romneycare program in MA. The development of the new website should have been a piece of cake.

    I just don’t understand how they could have f’d up so bad when they had the Romneycare model in place. Why are these people who handled this so poorly still in their jobs? What skills did they have in the first place to get such a position? Or was it just pay back?

    I want to know what I’m voting for in the elections? Because its looking more and more like I’m just voting against the other side.


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *