I ask this because it seems that getting the majority back whether it be in 2010 or 12 they have ultimately laid the blue print for completely shutting down the Government through procedural hurdles on a scale never seen before. Literally every senate bill has been required to have 60 votes, and while it is perfectly within the rights of the minority it seems a bad precedent to set.

Republicans will get the majority back at some point, but what happens when Democrats turn the tables and then do the same thing to them they did while they were in power. If they don't have 60 Republicans to break cloture, it seems like we are going to have complete gridlock on a scale the likes of which we have never seen as Democrats will just follow the Republican obstruction plan back to power.

I don't like half of these bills Democrats are bringing to the table (particularly healthcare) but it seems to me that we are entering a new phase of governing where the goal is to stop everything no matter what, and I just don't think that is healthy.

We shouldn't do away with the filibuster or anything, but there has to be a way to make it harder to do than just making the threat and all of the sudden everything comes to a halt.

How does everyone else feel about this issue? I think that Republicans are going to regret giving away the obstructionist playbook like they have because Democrats will do it back to them out of revenge, except without 60 votes to break a filibuster the way Dems have been able to they won't be able to enact any legislation, which should only ratchet up the anger that much further because we have entered an era where the minority party seems to be dictating the agenda.

It's my opinion that we will all regret it more if we don't prevent what the dems are trying to do.

^^^Weren't many of these procedures used by Democrats during their time in the minority under Bush? Not saying the filibuster should be used all the time, but this healthcare "reform" bill is certainly a worthy use of it if ever there was one.

Sure, the Republicans might regret it one day, but the people won't.

I love seeing the one party eat itself. Don't kid yourselves though, the vast majority of Republicans would love to see the health care passed because it gives them more power. However, they see a way to possibly hurt the Dems while doing it so its a win win situation.

I only wish that the government over the last 150 years had been so slow-moving.

Heck, it might have actually encouraged a little bit of thought into the sweeping actions that are taken so lightly that affect everyone in the country.

NNN wrote: I only wish that the government over the last 150 years had been so slow-moving.

Heck, it might have actually encouraged a little bit of thought into the sweeping actions that are taken so lightly that affect everyone in the country.

Yeah, all those stupid civil rights and environmental protections stopping companies from burying waste under playgrounds really went against the free market and cut into profits.

It's fine the way it is.... though it can be abused. This is especially true given the way both parties in power have recently played the emergency card. If there is pay back so be it. Elections have consequences... and 2010 and 2012 will be no different.

Gridlock is good. The less Washington does, the better off everybody is.

Less government is good government. If the Republicans can make less happen, I'm all for it.

IggyPride00 is just plain wrong about the cloture history of the senate. This whole thread is based on a false premise. In fact, the Democrats brought cloture to historic levels 8 years ago on judicial nominees. Both parties have used it extensively.

I wouldn't have too much of a problem with a government whose hands are tied down. It would only benefit the people.

God save the Queen

I Wear Pants wrote:

NNN wrote: I only wish that the government over the last 150 years had been so slow-moving.

Heck, it might have actually encouraged a little bit of thought into the sweeping actions that are taken so lightly that affect everyone in the country.

Yeah, all those stupid civil rights and environmental protections stopping companies from burying waste under playgrounds really went against the free market and cut into profits.

Which of those two was a knee-jerk reaction to a situation, and which one was something that was simply stuck into a bill more likely to pass?

I was just commenting on the fact that you act like the last 150 years have been terrible for the US.

If 60% of the senate can't agree there should be a vote on something... it probably shouldn't come to a vote... Theres your sign...

Since when is trying to block BAD legislation being "obstructionist"?

I'd say it's doing your job.

The American people don't want this reform. I'd say they are doing the will of the people.

Mr. 300 wrote: The American people don't want this reform. I'd say they are doing the will of the people.

They may be doing the will of the people, but the people gave the Dems enough seats in Congress to ram this farce of a bill down the people's throats.

If we have anyone to blame it should be ourselves.

The Republicans are now the party of no.

Bigdogg wrote: The Republicans are now the party of no.

Right now that's a damned good thing.

Bigdogg wrote: The Republicans are now the party of no.

Depends what a party is saying no to.

majorspark wrote:

Bigdogg wrote: The Republicans are now the party of no.

Depends what a party is saying no to.

Spending money we don't have should be pretty much an automatic no.

They're only the part of "no" when they aren't the ones in power in Congress. Then, they're completely happy being the party of "yes."

So, politicians are like women, no?