I called Sen. Reid's office today and talked with a staffer. I asked why

[rateyes]

he did not push for stronger filibuster reform. The staffer said, "that's Sen Reid's opinion." I asked the staffer to share my opinion with the Senator: "you, sir, did nothing good for the country today, and are a coward."

And, yes, I called before the vote, as well.

[Honeycombe8]

1. Good for you! Way to go, rateyes! nt

[fadedrose]

2. Now, Honeycombe8 and rateyes, that a real interesting couple....

[Ptah]

3. Insults and invective.

Meh

[rateyes]

5. insults, invective, and

the fucking truth.

[FarPoint]

11. Foolish and impotent behavior.

You accomplished nothing.

[rateyes]

12. Foolish, impotent...probably....

but, still the fucking truth.

[demwing]

41. You cant know that

so your criticism can as easily be directed toward yourself.

[rsmith6621]

4. Ill Bet The Farm....

....that staffer did not deliver that exact message without softening it up alot.

[rateyes]

7. Even though he said he would, I bet you are right.

[benld74]

6. Ed Show is going to cover exactly that coming up,,,,,,

[fadedrose]

9. Thanks, Rachel will cover too..

Best thing since sliced bread.

It's almost like Michael Renny got off the Ufo and addressed the Senate and told them to stop screwing around or he'll do a nuclear option, one that they can't filibuster by phone....

[Tx4obama]

8. Senator Reid got the majority of what HE wanted.

See here: http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022254993#post3

Reid got a lot of good stuff in the deal

[rateyes]

10. It isnt about him. Its about the country. He is a failure.

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

13. and so is Barbara Boxer and Diane Feinstein who opposed Reform. Jack Reed, a liberal from R.I.

also opposed reform. Why didn't you call their offices?

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

14. Why didn't you call Barbara Boxer, Diane Feinstein, and Jack Reed? All opposed reforms.

[rateyes]

15. Because he is the LEADER, and wouldnt get them on record.

And, he said yesterday he had the votes.

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

39. Yes, call him, but also call those senators. We need to put pressure, not only on the *LEADER* but

on those who directly represent us. Reid is in the position he's in because Dem senators put him there. That does not absolve us from contacting them, too, and holding them accountable.

[onenote]

16. I keep asking, but no one answers: what difference would it make

in terms of getting legislation passed. Bills still have to pass the House and the Senate and nothing the repubs don't want is passing the House and getting to the president's desk.

So I ask again -- what practical difference would we see if the fiilbuster rule was changed?

[rateyes]

17. Really? Nothing the repubs dont want isnt getting to Obama's desk?

The wealthy just got a tax increase, signed by Obama.

[onenote]

18. And it got there without filibuster reform. Because enough repubs

viewed it as the best they could get. But if you think there is a situation in which the Senate is going to filibuster something that would pass the House you are dreaming.

[rateyes]

19. There is a better chance of it passing if it can get out of the Senate.

[onenote]

20. give me an example of a bill that could pass the House but was filibustered

Just one will do.

[rateyes]

21. The public option.

This in 111th Congress.

[onenote]

23. Care to back that up? The public option wasn't killed by a filibuster

It was killed in Committee even though the Democrats controlled the Senate.

Plus, we controlled the House then. We don't control it today, which is why the rending of garments about this decision seems overblown.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB125424025772149687.html

[rateyes]

24. See the next post. As for p.o.

it would have been filibustered had Harry had the balls to bring it up for a vote, and could have passed it under reconciliation..Another example of Harrys spinelessness.

[onenote]

26. It couldn't be brought up because it didn't get out of Committee

How a bill becomes a law 101.
If the majority leader can bring up any bill he wants, why have committee votes?

[rateyes]

22. Creating American Jobs and Ending Offshoring Act...on its way to passage in House,

killed in Senate with the filibuster after a majority was in favor. this in 112th Congress with a repub majority.

One will do, you said. I have more if you want.

[onenote]

27. What evidence is there that it would have passed the House?

A companion bill to the Senate version was never even introduced in the House. Why didn't the supporters of the bill bring it up in the House to create pressure on the Senate?

[rateyes]

28. It wasnt brought up in House because the Senate killed it with a filibuster...I now refer you to my

next post about the DREAM act.

[onenote]

33. Again, how a bill becomes a law

Far more commonly than not, when a bill is introduced in the Senate, a companion bill is introduced in the House. There are several reasons, both political and procedural for doing this. Your Dream Act example is a good one -- its been introduced several times in both the House and Senate. In fact, its passage in the House came AFTER a companion version was blocked in the Senate. Once it passed the House, it went back to the Senate again and came much closer to getting through the filibuster than it had previously.

I will concede that the Dream Act is an example of a bill that passed the House but was blocked in the Senate. But that was when the Democrats controlled the House and the situation today is much different.

[rateyes]

25. The DREAM Act had already passed the House, and would be law today had the

Senate not filibustered it. Want more?

[rateyes]

30. Emergency Senior Citizens Relief Act. Passed Repub House with large majority...

died in Senate to filibuster.

[onenote]

34. When did the Emergency Sr. Citizens Relief Act pass the House?

You may be right, but I don't recall it and I can't find any record of it.

[rateyes]

36. 2011

[onenote]

40. I believe you are mistaken

There is no record of the Emergency Senior Citizens bill having even been introduced in 2011, let alone passed in the House. Two versions were introduced in the House and one in the Senate in 2009 and none of them got out of Committee. Two versions were introduced in the Senate in 2010 -- one stayed in Committee and the other was filibustered. No House action at all in 2010. And no House or Senate action at all in 2011 or 2012.

[KharmaTrain]

35. Also...

...it prevents some of the batshit crazy bills the rushpublicans passed out of the House from reaching the Senate floor.

The change is supposed to cut back on the number of silent holds...especially for judicial and other nominations so that the backlog in the courts can be cleared up (a big thing as it means appointing Democratic judges) as well as forcing the person who puts the hold to come to the Senate floor instead of hiding. Incremental changes, but change.

The hang up here is the Democrats have teo protect more seats in 2014 than rushpublicans have and could easily lose the majority if Democrats stay home again like they did in 2010. Then those who wanted the nuclear option would cry about not having the filibuster...it's always whose ox is being gored...

[Freddie Stubbs]

38. Nominations which must be approved by the Senate (but not the House)?

[Angry Dragon]

29. I called his office many times today and never could get through

[rateyes]

31. I was on hold for 10 mins.

[Matariki]

32. I REALLY don't get this

I remember seeing him talk about pushing filibuster reform and changing the 60 vote thing. He seemed so farking earnest.

This is from 2010:

[mnhtnbb]

37. Too bad Hillary couldn't have loaned her cojones to Reid for the day.

I do not understand why the Dems don't replace him with someone
who has some spine.