On Dec 13, 2008, at 1:06 PM, Marty Hart-Landsberg wrote:
But I am not sure that what happened is in accord with what Carl
says below, that the democrats "could have passed the bill but not
have defeated the filibuster."
According to the papers the bill did pass, with 52 votes. Doesnt a
filibuster take place to stop a vote?
I believe that was a vote for cloture i.e., it was a vote to end
debate (pro-actively) and head directly to voting on the bill, thus
avoiding a filibuster. That failed, because to pass it needs 60 votes.
There are other ways around the filibuster, of course, such as omnibus
bills that the Republicans cannot afford to filibuster. But at some
point, the Democrats need to stop worrying about productivity and let
the filibusters take place. Or they can take the GOP route and
threaten to revoke the filibuster capability using their Senate
majority. The Gang of 14 might rear their head again, in response.
Warning: I am no expert on this stuff.
--ravi
--
Support something better than yourself ;-)
PeTA => http://peta.org/
Greenpeace => http://greenpeace.org/
If you have nothing better to read: http://platosbeard.org/
_______________________________________________
pen-l mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l
