Sen. Harry Reid is now trying to change Senate Filibuster Rules with Obamas blessing! Is this a good or bad idea?

Harry Reid is an idiot and makes me sick to my stomach

I agree!

Good idea, change them back to the way they have always been before the republicans changed them and then abused them.

It's a bad idea and has been every time either party has suggested it. But Reid doesn't have to worry about the filibuster. He, Obama and Holder will find some way to trample the Constitution to get what they want whether it's legal or not.

It's just as bad an idea as it was when the GOP proposed the same thing!!! The one change I would definitely be for would be to require that the filibuster be made, and held PHYSICALLY!!!

So the turd Reid is at it again, just doesn't know how to keep his mouth shut.

The progressives in the Whitehouse and in congress can put forth NOTHING that is good for the political process or the country. That is just a sad reality of the world we have created.

anything Senator Reid does is bad

Republicans shouldn't be able to bring government to a stop. I support the filibuster but it should be like in the old days. See Mr. Smith goes to Washington. There is a reason why there weren't so many of them back then.

Both parties hate the filibuster when they control the Senate and threaten to try an change the rules and because a filibuster is a "House Rule", it can be changed in the Senate.

While Filibusters may seem bad, a Filibuster allows the minority party a chance to block bad law, that is why it was implemented. Keeping the majority from pushing through harmful laws.

It is interesting how partisan politics plays out on this issue. Liberals love the idea when they are in power, but fight against it when they are not. Republicans do the exact same thing.

People are willing to shoot themselves in the foot, just to thumb their nose at the other party.

Trying to by-pass congress again?

If the GOP was in control and the only defense the liberal progressive social democrats had to thwart legislation you can bet they would and have made use of filibustering. No, leave it as it is.

I received an email for this subject and clicked on it and was AUTOMATICALLY VOTED GOOD IDEA FOR THIS QUESTION WHICH I WOULD HAVE VOTED BAD IDEA~~ THIS IS NOT THE FIRST TIME THIS HAS HAPPENED TO ME~~ ANYONE ELSE HAVING THIS PROBLEM??

Who sent the email?

yes I had a lot of that happen to me last week. at first I just thought maybe I'd hit the wrong keys but it kept happening. hasn't happened this week

Go back to the old rules when they had to actually hold the floor. The one term agenda has made it a necessity.
Just filing a paper makes it way too easy which is why congress set records in the last few years.
If they had to actually put effort into it there would fewer and it would speed things up. Maybe they could get something done for a change.

TERRIBLE idea. Both sides of the aisle have used the filibuster to block votes. This could come back and bite the Dems big-time. For now, with a Dem majority, it is a power-grab by Dingy Harry.

Actually the Senate functioned best when it took a 2/3 majority to do any thing.

Uh what's the point in having a minority at all if you are going to overrule it?

the filibuster is terribly abused. I hope he changes it.

It a very good ideas, Just like in the house, the majority votes win.

Good ideas don't come from POS's like Filthy Harridan Reid!

But it's not absolutely necessary. There is a process now called the "nuclear option" for invoking cloture for nominee confirmations. It went like this in 2005, except the roles for Democrats and Republicans were reversed:
1. The Senate moves to vote on a controversial nominee.
2. At least 41 Senators call for filibuster.
3. The Senate Majority Leader raises a point of order, saying debate has gone on long enough and that a vote must be taken within a certain time frame. (Current Senate rules requires a cloture vote at this point.)
4. The Vice President -- acting as presiding officer -- sustains the point of order.
5. A Democratic Senator appeals the decision.
6. A Republican Senator moves to table the motion on the floor (the appeal).
7. This vote - to table the appeal - is procedural and cannot be subjected to a filibuster; it requires only a majority vote (in case of a tie, the Vice President casts the tie-breaking vote).
8. With debate ended, the Senate would vote on the issue at hand; this vote requires only a majority of those voting. The filibuster has effectively been closed with a majority vote instead of a three-fifths vote.

We need to be able to shut down any dumocret vote.

Good idea if you are a Democrat.

Democrats have been using the Constitution as a floor mat.

Why stop now?

The shoe was on the other foot in 2005. What goes around comes around.

It figures anything to help their cause and to continue tearing this country apart without any interference from anyone.

The filibuster is an important part of Congress. However it has been abused in years and expanded from its original purpose of protecting minority rights. The filibuster should be reformed to end remote filibustering and holds on nominations. If a vote is important enough to filibuster you should have to physically be on the floor to do so.

Good idea if you want to kick the fiscal cliff can down the road a little further & pretend there is no cliff.

No......No.......No.......get your guns ready folks, most of us know where this is going! Defend the Constitution or else lose America!

bad idea, he is not using his head, but then it may be because he has no brain.. this can jump up and bite him in the ass, he may think of screwing the Rep,but what happens when the shoe is on the other foot, he ends up screwing himself....

elections do have consequences

If you have objections stand up and voice them in the senate, don't sit there all day with your thumb up your ass.

IT SHOULD BE ABOUT SIMPLE MAJORITY RATHER THAN PLAYING GAMES BEHIND THE SCENES. IF THEY WANT TO FILLIBUSTER LET THEM STAND UP AND BE SEEN.

"These two forms of government: Democracy and Republic, are not only dissimilar but antithetical, reflecting the sharp contrast between (a) The Majority Unlimited, in a Democracy, lacking any legal safeguard of the rights of The Individual and The Minority, and (b) The Majority Limited, in a Republic under a written Constitution safeguarding the rights of The Individual and The Minority; as we shall now see."
http://www.lexrex.com/enlight...

This nation is a Republic, not a Democracy. But I see you probably went to school in CA, so you might not know this.

Good idea, maybe they can get something done if the Republicans can't use fillibuster to stall and defeat everything the president wants to get done. And for that matter, on either side.

But I bet that if they are unsuccessful & the GOP wants to do the very same thing they (Demoncrats) will cry Foul, foul, foul all the way home.

Already did that. Remember the Nuclear Option of a couple of years ago?? and how much Obummer and Hoss thief Harry Cried back then???