Can Senate Dems remove the filibuster for a bill making abortion legal for all of USA?

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Nov 29, 2006
15,695
4,204
136
IDK, I think we have a situation where the dog finally caught the car, and now Rs are going to have to deal with all the consequences of their extreme positions.

Rape babies, incest babies, imprisoned women and doctors, women dying from complications, thousands of unwanted children (make orphanages great again?)

....

Maybe the public needs to understand the implications of what they are proposing and the desire for change back needs to be organic and not just from a slim party line vote, or a judicial ruling. That won't be durable and will just leave Ds playing defense.

I say anyone who wanted an abortion but couldn't get one, should dump all the babies on the SC door step like its a fire station. Let them deal with all the babies. Press would be all over this watching how they handle it.
 

KB

Diamond Member
Nov 8, 1999
5,402
386
126
But the argument that they shouldn't because "it's a slippery slope and the R's will just use it do X when they take back power" is complete and utter bullshit. Rs already do whatever the fuck they want, rules be damned. They want judges and tax cuts, which can already be done without 60+ votes.


Judges used to be subject to the filibuster, but the DEMs went nuclear and canceled that. They reaped what they sowed and now we have three conservatives added in one term.
This may be why they don't want to do it again.


EDIT: A colleague mentioned additional details to this. Both sides have committed the "nuclear" option, blocking the "filibuster". DEMS did it first in 2013 with federal nominees and and presidential appts and GOP did it in 2017 with SC appts. Both sides know changing the filibuster rules could bite them back later.

 
Last edited:

Paratus

Lifer
Jun 4, 2004
17,117
14,484
146
Judges used to be subject to the filibuster, but the DEMs went nuclear and canceled that. They reaped what they sowed and now we have three conservatives added in one term.
This may be why they don't want to do it again.

Due to historic use of the filibuster to block judges by Mconnell and the GOP.

But look at you thinking Ol’ Mitch hasn’t dropped the filibuster for everything he cares about.

I like your mainstream media link too.
 

Pens1566

Lifer
Oct 11, 2005
12,284
9,113
136
Judges used to be subject to the filibuster, but the DEMs went nuclear and canceled that. They reaped what they sowed and now we have three conservatives added in one term.
This may be why they don't want to do it again.


That's just slightly disingenuous on how it came about, but ok.
 

pete6032

Diamond Member
Dec 3, 2010
7,675
3,218
136
Because they don't get enough votes!!!!! Something like 24 rural states have the total population of just California. How many Senators does California get 2. You figure it out! The EC and the Senate have to go!
That's part of it but they also need to get their shit together and at least push for some progressive policies. Just off the top of my head:

My Fortune 500 "employer provided" health care plan should not cost me $1,200 a month ($14,400 annually) with a deductible of $3,500. We need Medicare for all, badly.

Child care should not cost $2,000 a month for one child.

College should not cost $30,000 per year.

Community college should be free in every state (Granted this is mostly a state-level policy).

We should have universal pre-k.

New mothers deserve more than six weeks off paid.

The minimum wage should be more than $7.25. (Dems have done some things here but still no major improvements).
 
  • Like
Reactions: Captante

Fenixgoon

Lifer
Jun 30, 2003
32,120
10,946
136
That's part of it but they also need to get their shit together and at least push for some progressive policies. Just off the top of my head:

My Fortune 500 "employer provided" health care plan should not cost me $1,200 a month ($14,400 annually) with a deductible of $3,500. We need Medicare for all, badly.

Child care should not cost $2,000 a month for one child.

College should not cost $30,000 per year.

Community college should be free in every state (Granted this is mostly a state-level policy).

We should have universal pre-k.

New mothers deserve more than six weeks off paid.

The minimum wage should be more than $7.25. (Dems have done some things here but still no major improvements).
dems have been pushing for those policies. here's what was in the initial biden infrastructure plan:

and here's biden's proposed American Families plan:

part of the negotiations surrounding infrastructure were around universal pre-k

so if you want to blame democrats, blame the 2 who constantly bullshit and hold things up, along with 50 republican senators who don't give a fuck about the average person.


if dems had 51 reliable votes, almost no question everything you listed would have happened.
 

MrSquished

Lifer
Jan 14, 2013
23,082
21,203
136
dems have been pushing for those policies. here's what was in the initial biden infrastructure plan:

and here's biden's proposed American Families plan:

part of the negotiations surrounding infrastructure were around universal pre-k

so if you want to blame democrats, blame the 2 who constantly bullshit and hold things up, along with 50 republican senators who don't give a fuck about the average person.


if dems had 51 reliable votes, almost no question everything you listed would have happened.
Yeah he keeps saying the same stuff and doesn't understand how the house and Senate work, the filibuster, how it is abused, how the Senate House and EC are stacked due to terrible design by the founding fathers.
 

Thump553

Lifer
Jun 2, 2000
12,757
2,533
126
IDK, I think we have a situation where the dog finally caught the car, and now Rs are going to have to deal with all the consequences of their extreme positions.

Rape babies, incest babies, imprisoned women and doctors, women dying from complications, thousands of unwanted children (make orphanages great again?)

....

Maybe the public needs to understand the implications of what they are proposing and the desire for change back needs to be organic and not just from a slim party line vote, or a judicial ruling. That won't be durable and will just leave Ds playing defense.

I can pretty much guarantee that the GOP will keep this alive as a major issue. Faux News will make a big issue out of blue states having laws permitting abortion but also specifically permitting abortions for people from other states who travel there. Faux News and the GOP Party will say the only solution is a federal law prohibiting abortion nationwide, and to do so they need control of both Houses and the Presidency. This is going to continue to be a major GOP promotion issue for decades to come or the collapse of our democracy, whichever comes first.
 

pete6032

Diamond Member
Dec 3, 2010
7,675
3,218
136
Yeah he keeps saying the same stuff and doesn't understand how the house and Senate work, the filibuster, how it is abused, how the Senate House and EC are stacked due to terrible design by the founding fathers.
Dems need to start playing hardball. No more whining. We can't let the Republicans legislate from the bench. Time to expand the Supreme Court and push for popular vote winning presidency. All I hear is complaining about Republicans unfairly seizing power. If the Democrats had their ducks in a row we could make actual progress in this country.
 
  • Like
Reactions: hal2kilo

Bitek

Lifer
Aug 2, 2001
10,676
5,238
136
I can pretty much guarantee that the GOP will keep this alive as a major issue. Faux News will make a big issue out of blue states having laws permitting abortion but also specifically permitting abortions for people from other states who travel there. Faux News and the GOP Party will say the only solution is a federal law prohibiting abortion nationwide, and to do so they need control of both Houses and the Presidency. This is going to continue to be a major GOP promotion issue for decades to come or the collapse of our democracy, whichever comes first.

Agreed, but I think their job is now much harder. Easy to be against something, hard to constantly defend the consequences of policies.

Otoh, I don't think Ds have had the pressure to create strong political arguments for the right. It's been reproductive rights, or arguments about court precedent (and that's now out the window.)

They'll have time to sharpen arguments and fight back, but not a whole lot.

Totally agree this will continue to political battle.
 

Bitek

Lifer
Aug 2, 2001
10,676
5,238
136
Yeah he keeps saying the same stuff and doesn't understand how the house and Senate work, the filibuster, how it is abused, how the Senate House and EC are stacked due to terrible design by the founding fathers.

But you're not going to change the EC any faster than getting an amendment passed that's specific in codifying these rights explicitly.

Neither are soon to happen really.

There are no quick fixes.
 

pmv

Lifer
May 30, 2008
13,636
8,522
136
Am I correct in understanding that the filibuster was only created by accident in the first place? What I read somewhere was it was accidentally bought into existence by a careless attempt to 'reform' and 'tidy up' procedures for voting in the Senate.
 

Fenixgoon

Lifer
Jun 30, 2003
32,120
10,946
136
Agreed, but I think their job is now much harder. Easy to be against something, hard to constantly defend the consequences of policies.

Otoh, I don't think Ds have had the pressure to create strong political arguments for the right. It's been reproductive rights, or arguments about court precedent (and that's now out the window.)

They'll have time to sharpen arguments and fight back, but not a whole lot.

Totally agree this will continue to political battle.

every horror story needs to be run. its horrible to use something so personal as political ammo, but voters need to see the consequences.

"this is where voting republican gets you".
 
  • Like
Reactions: hal2kilo

Captante

Lifer
Oct 20, 2003
30,316
10,814
136
I want to say it won't be... but I have overestimated our voters at least twice before.


Democratic exasperation builds at Biden's slow roll on Roe

Current Democratic leadership is completely incompetent from Biden on down.... at this point unless they can pull their collective heads out of their rear-ends pronto, the mid-terms will be a total disaster and literally ZERO will get done between then and losing the White house in an epic landslide in '24.
 
  • Like
Reactions: pete6032

UNCjigga

Lifer
Dec 12, 2000
24,938
9,221
136
Just another example of how Dems seem incapable of unfucking themselves, despite their best intentions. Incumbency was once seen as a strength, with names like Biden, Feinstein, Schumer, Leahy and Markey serving as a bulwark in the Senate. We should have heeded the warnings after Kennedy’s death imperiled Obama’s agenda. When will we get the new blood we need—nevermind in battleground states, but even in Dem strongholds?

 

nakedfrog

No Lifer
Apr 3, 2001
59,239
13,843
136
every horror story needs to be run. its horrible to use something so personal as political ammo, but voters need to see the consequences.

"this is where voting republican gets you".
You should see some of the callous "well we don't know all the facts" responses to the 10 year old rape victim that was denied an abortion in Ohio. There's nothing the Nationalist Christians (Nat-Cs) can't hand-wave away or plug their ears to hide from, they're not interested in reality (and when it comes home to roost for them personally, there's nothing they can't rationalize)
 
  • Like
Reactions: hal2kilo and dank69

Zorba

Lifer
Oct 22, 1999
15,244
10,818
136
The Democratic party has proven time and time again that they cannot accomplish anything meaningful at the Federal level.
Actually they've proven regardless of what they do accomplish, they'll get no credit. Considering how hard it is to do anything in our system they've actually accomplished a lot, especially when compared to republicans.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Brainonska511

Greenman

Lifer
Oct 15, 1999
20,941
5,564
136
Judges used to be subject to the filibuster, but the DEMs went nuclear and canceled that. They reaped what they sowed and now we have three conservatives added in one term.
This may be why they don't want to do it again.


EDIT: A colleague mentioned additional details to this. Both sides have committed the "nuclear" option, blocking the "filibuster". DEMS did it first in 2013 with federal nominees and and presidential appts and GOP did it in 2017 with SC appts. Both sides know changing the filibuster rules could bite them back later.

That was a good read, thanks for posting.
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
85,637
50,864
136
That was a good read, thanks for posting.
Unfortunately what he wrote is at best deeply misleading and at worst downright false.

What actually happened is really pretty simple -

1) under Bush the democrats were filibustering some judicial nominees and the GOP said they would nuke the filibuster if Democrats persisted. This resulted in a deal where those judges were confirmed and the filibuster retained, with the deal stating the filibuster would only be used in ‘extraordinary circumstances’

2) under Obama the GOP declared that they would filibuster any nominee Obama made to the DC Circuit, no matter who it was. This was a plain violation of the prior deal.

3) Reid enforced the GOP’s own demands that the filibuster be removed unless it was only used in extraordinary circumstances.

Don’t get me wrong, I’m happy they got rid of it and think it should be removed for everything, but the real story of why is that the GOP refused to abide by the terms of their own deal.
 

K1052

Elite Member
Aug 21, 2003
48,094
37,295
136
All the blame from Republicans on the Dems for ditching the filibuster for judicial noms should be filed right next to the you can't confirm a SCOTUS justice within X months of a presidential election talk. Yes, over there in the bin labeled "Unbelievable Self Serving Horse Shit".
 

Pens1566

Lifer
Oct 11, 2005
12,284
9,113
136
Any argument against removing the filibuster "because it might be used by the other side in the future so they end up getting exactly what they want" is bullshit. Because the other side has already been getting whatever they want anyway. They only care about judges and tax cuts, both of which they can do whenever they please with a simple majority.

"We have to play by the rules or else the other side won't play by the rules" doesn't work as they've been breaking the rules for quite a while now.
 
  • Like
Reactions: hal2kilo