Reconciliation has been used 22 times before, but the average vote in favor during the times used has been 67 votes... It's primarily been used as a time-saver in some cases, as there's a 20-hour rule on debate when using it. Also, using the tactic for major legislation is exceedingly rare.
I'm sure you've seen this by now:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SjdbjrXiobQ
In it, Democrats, including Barack Obama, blow a gasket when Republicans threaten to use the tactic to short-circuit filibusters on judicial nominees. They call them Nazis for doing so! And here this use would have been far less dramatic. It wasn't even legislation, just judicial appointees. The Democrats started a general tactic of filibustering the President's judicial nominees - something that had never been done as a general tactic in the history of the Republic up until that time. Congress had taken the President's Constitutional prerogative to make judicial appointments seriously, and limited their advise and consent role to simple majority votes. The Democrats filibustering these nominees in such a way was just unprecedented, so the Republicans contemplated using Reconciliation to restore the traditional, two-hundred plus year status quo on the matter.
That's when the Democrats basically said such a move would amount to the dismantling of the Republic. They even warned that if they allowed such a precedent, it would start simply, on nominees, but then it would move to executive orders, and then, cue scary music... to legislation!!! That was the big climax of the terror of what reconciliation might bring if allowed.
And the Republicans demured, even just for judicial appointments. Didn't happen.
Now we have many of those same Demcocrats ready to set aside all their concerns about blowing up the Republic by using reconciliation to pass not just a nominee or an executive order, but legislation! The very thing they said would be third-Reichish had the Republicans done so. And not just any legislation, mind you, but very unpopular legislation that will ultimately remake the entire fabric of American society.
How you can possibly not find this the height of hypocrisy and dishonor, especially as a Christian who should uphold the values of honesty in debate over the more vulgar concerns of "what side your on", is beyond me.
2 comments:
got it, thanks
Reconciliation has been used 22 times before, but the average vote in favor during the times used has been 67 votes... It's primarily been used as a time-saver in some cases, as there's a 20-hour rule on debate when using it. Also, using the tactic for major legislation is exceedingly rare.
I'm sure you've seen this by now:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SjdbjrXiobQ
In it, Democrats, including Barack Obama, blow a gasket when Republicans threaten to use the tactic to short-circuit filibusters on judicial nominees. They call them Nazis for doing so! And here this use would have been far less dramatic. It wasn't even legislation, just judicial appointees. The Democrats started a general tactic of filibustering the President's judicial nominees - something that had never been done as a general tactic in the history of the Republic up until that time. Congress had taken the President's Constitutional prerogative to make judicial appointments seriously, and limited their advise and consent role to simple majority votes. The Democrats filibustering these nominees in such a way was just unprecedented, so the Republicans contemplated using Reconciliation to restore the traditional, two-hundred plus year status quo on the matter.
That's when the Democrats basically said such a move would amount to the dismantling of the Republic. They even warned that if they allowed such a precedent, it would start simply, on nominees, but then it would move to executive orders, and then, cue scary music... to legislation!!! That was the big climax of the terror of what reconciliation might bring if allowed.
And the Republicans demured, even just for judicial appointments. Didn't happen.
Now we have many of those same Demcocrats ready to set aside all their concerns about blowing up the Republic by using reconciliation to pass not just a nominee or an executive order, but legislation! The very thing they said would be third-Reichish had the Republicans done so. And not just any legislation, mind you, but very unpopular legislation that will ultimately remake the entire fabric of American society.
How you can possibly not find this the height of hypocrisy and dishonor, especially as a Christian who should uphold the values of honesty in debate over the more vulgar concerns of "what side your on", is beyond me.
Post a Comment