Senate Democrats are promising pre-emptive gridlock for 2013


#1

Even if Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan win on November 6, his agenda will be stymied if Republicans can’t pick up at least three more seats than their current 47 and control the Senate. That’s clear from the last two years, when Harry Reid’s not-so-deliberative body became the graveyard for fiscal and other reform.

House Republicans won an historic midterm election in 2010, picking up 63 seats. They also gained six Senate seats, but a handful of weak GOP candidates (Sharron Angle, Ken Buck, Christine O’Donnell) cost them control of the upper body. Back in charge in 2011, Mr. Reid proceeded to stop nearly everything that House Republicans passed. President Obama hasn’t even had to sweat a veto fight because nothing escapes Mr. Reid’s lost world.

Review & Outlook: Harry Reid’s Graveyard - WSJ.com

So what is new? The democrats have been practicing gridlock since 2006.


#2

harry reid is a evil man, a shill and sycophant for Obammy

Harry Reid is what is wrong with Nevada[LEFT][/LEFT]


#3

Even if the Republicans get the majority, the dems WILL filibuster, mark my words. Unless Romney has the ability to BRING two recalcitrant sides together like rats and cats, NOTHING WILL GET DONE!
Obama has done far more damage to this nation in 31/2 years than Hitler did to europe from the 30’s to the 40’s. I’m not so sure Romney will want the job when he is elected.


#4

YES YES, YES, and YES!!!


#5

Said the pot to the kettle. When Republicans controlled the Senate, cloture motions per year hovered around 70 per year, where it had hovered since 1995. When Republicans lost control, that doubled to 140 per year.


#6

I love gridlock – except for repealing Obamacare. That piece of trash needs to be removed from the books.


#7

It sucks when stuff you want is gridlocked, doesn’t it?


#8

Trekky, I’m pretty much sick of you and your attitude. I have never put anyone on ‘ignore’ but you are first on the list. Filibusters have been used on both sides when contentious legislation has been involved. But with the Reid Senate stonewalling legislation and Obama overreaching his constitutional liability [ie: Obamacare] there has erupted a realm of contentiousness unseen in the USA history. Reid knowing that republicans would filibuster much of the socialist agenda Obama was trying to ram through, locked any republican proposals to counter Obamawerk. As the election tide turns the democrat reciprocal will be ferocious.


#9

Of course the fillibuster and cloture votes have been around for a while…and since there is no way for Reps to get 60 seats…it will either require some Dems ready to compromise with Romney or the Senate will remain the block to MOST legislation.

But take heart… IF we get a simple majority…the Senate Committees will be controlled by Reps, and the big one…remember this name…RECONCILLIATION will be done by majority vote. "**

“The nuclear option is not to be confused with reconciliation, which allows issues related to the annual budget to be decided by a majority vote without the possibility of filibuster.**”

This is why I say that 50 seats in the Senate is so crucial. Everyone here in every state with a Rep in a tight race for the Senate needs to get out and vote for him even if you’re writing in Virgil Goode for President. We MUST have the ability to control the budget and spending. Anything else is of secondary importance.


#10

[quote=“Trekky0623, post:7, topic:36835”]
It sucks when stuff you want is gridlocked, doesn’t it?
[/quote]Gridlock would have (should have) solved that particular problem in the first place. Gridlock is your friend except when you try to undo the garbage they pass when one of the parties has control of everything.


#11

One single party shouldn’t have control of anything, but too many senators simply vote based on party lines rather than actually reading legislation. I remember reading stories where a good portion of representatives or senators didn’t even know what was in the bill they were voting on. I’m confident that if a couple of moderates were thrown into the mix, the filibustering and partisan voting would stop for the most part. We need more compromise, but both parties, not just Dems, and not just Republicans, fail to compromise on ANY legislation at all.


#12

Trekky; compromise is what got us into the whole mess to begin with. Compromise is NOT YOUR FRIEND> In the long run compromise is capitulation to principle.


#13

[quote=“Trekky0623, post:11, topic:36835”]
but both parties, not just Dems, and not just Republicans, fail to compromise on ANY legislation at all.
[/quote]I fail to see a downside to this.

[quote=“njc17, post:12, topic:36835”]
Trekky; compromise is what got us into the whole mess to begin with. Compromise is NOT YOUR FRIEND> In the long run compromise is capitulation to principle.
[/quote]Often :yeahthat:


#14

RECONCILLIATION; isn’t that how the Democrats passed Obamacare?


#15

Like when Nancy Makeup said we have to pass the bill to see whats in it speaking about Obamacare?