Democrats Elminate Filibusters For Most Nominations By Presidents.

[AgeofKnowledge]

The Democrats weakened minority rights scuttling more than two hundred years of precedent that balanced government power by limiting that of the executive branch while ensuring the minority had a voice. The Senate filibuster also provided a means of measuring the strength of that voice. It was there for a reason.

Now whatever the Democratic majority in the Senate wants, it can do with a simple majority. Obama welcomed the change because now he can cram whatever he wants down the throats of all Americans as long as the Democrat controlled Senate goes along with it.

Filibuster: Protects the Rights of Senators and the American People

 

[jimmydiggs]

It's amazing to see how much our government and culture is changing in only a few years.

 

[JimJimmers]

I recall in '03 or so, Miguel Estrada's nomination was not being put through. The Republicans threatened to change the Senate rules.

The way the Democrats told it, this so-called "nuclear option" was the worst thing anyone could ever possibly do to the country.


The Republicans said it was the Constitutional option, and it was a fine thing to do. They never did it, however, and Mr. Estrada eventually went away.

 

[kayem77]

Great, as if Obama needed more unlimited authoritarian power.

 

[AgeofKnowledge]

All true Jim. When you have two corrupt parties operating in a two party system...

I recall in '03 or so, Miguel Estrada's nomination was not being put through. The Republicans threatened to change the Senate rules.

The way the Democrats told it, this so-called "nuclear option" was the worst thing anyone could ever possibly do to the country.


The Republicans said it was the Constitutional option, and it was a fine thing to do. They never did it, however, and Mr. Estrada eventually went away.

 

[Ritter]

Great, as if Obama needed more unlimited authoritarian power.

Thankfully, this move is a sign that the President has realized his limits. His Presidency is coming under more and more scrutiny by the public and (some) members of the legal system. When the corruption of the administration is prosecuted, it will start in the very courts he is seeking to pack.

Is this move unconstitutional? Yes. Should the Democrats pay for it at the hands of a Republican party cognizant of its own past inequities? Most certainly.

The fact Mr. Obama sees the need though, takes away from his "no drama" persona and shows that the rule of law is, at least to some degree, respected at the moment.

Maybe not so much law as political consequences. A shame.