Progressives Trash Senate's Failure to Get Meaningful Filibuster Reform
" />

Abused by a minority Republican party unyielding in its strategy to block any progressive legislation with which they disagree, critics say Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid's failure to push through a return of the "talking filibuster" crushes most hope for progress on the nation's most pressing problems.
"This country faces major crises in terms of the economy and unemployment, the deficit, global warming, health care, campaign finance reform, education and a crumbling infrastructure," said Senator Bernie Sanders (I-VT), explaining why he voted against the measure's weak provisions.
"In my view, none of these problems will be effectively addressed so long as one senator can demand 60 votes to pass legislation. The rule changes adopted today ... are not enough."
Democratic Senator Tom Harkin of Iowa went on record to say that the meager reforms will make passage of meaningful legislation in the Senate nearly impossible.
Harkin told reporters: "I said to President Obama back in August ... and I said to him the night before the election, I said to him, 'Look, if you get reelected, if we don't do something significant about filibuster reform, you might as well take a four-year vacation,'"
"This is not significant," Harkin added.
Adam Green, co-founder of the Progressive Change Campaign Committee, whose members had pushed for stronger reforms called the Senate's decision one "based on fear." The rules passed, he said, "will ultimately hurt millions of people who would have been helped by progressive bills that Republicans are sure to filibuster."
A group called Fix the Senate Now, which also rallied behind stronger measures, called the result a "missed an opportunity to restore accountability and deliberation to the Senate, while not raising the costs of obstruction."
"The incremental 'reforms' in the agreement do not go nearly far enough to deliver meaningful change," the group said.
Digby, political blogger at the Campaign for America's Future, summed up the deal by saying: "Better than nothing, but still not much. The story of our time."
And others put the focus directly on Reid, who had once threatened to exert all efforts and use all options at his disposal to see the strong changes enacted.
"My friend Harry Reid, the senator from Searchlight, NV, has gone missing in the fight for filibuster reform," said Common Cause President Bob Edgar. "The deal he and Sen. McConnell have struck allows individual senators to continue blocking debate and action by the entire body and to do so without explaining themselves to their colleagues or the American people. This is not the Senate of debate and deliberation our founders envisioned."
Senator Sanders seemed to agree with Edgar's last sentiment. In his closing floor statement, Sanders told his fellow Senators and those watching:
Most Americans grew up believing that in America the majority rules. That is not the case in the Senate.
For many years now, especially since President Obama has been in office, it has taken 60 votes to pass any significant piece of legislation. When Lyndon Johnson was majority leader in the 1950s, he filed cloture to end a filibuster only once. Majority Leader Reid has filed cloture 390 times.
The Senate is not the House and the minority party must be treated with respect and given the opportunity to offer amendments and make their case in opposition. A minority must not, however, be allowed to permanently obstruct the wishes of the majority. That is not democracy. That is a perversion of democracy.
In my view, if a senator or a group of senators are strenuously opposed to legislation they have the right and duty to come to the floor and, for as long as they want, engage in a talking filibuster by explaining to the American people the reasons for their objection. They should not, however, continue to have the right to abuse arcane Senate rules to block a majority of senators from acting on behalf of the American people.
And yet, it appears, that is exactly what they'll get the opportunity to do.
Urgent. It's never been this bad.
Dear Common Dreams reader, It’s been nearly 30 years since I co-founded Common Dreams with my late wife, Lina Newhouser. We had the radical notion that journalism should serve the public good, not corporate profits. It was clear to us from the outset what it would take to build such a project. No paid advertisements. No corporate sponsors. No millionaire publisher telling us what to think or do. Many people said we wouldn't last a year, but we proved those doubters wrong. Together with a tremendous team of journalists and dedicated staff, we built an independent media outlet free from the constraints of profits and corporate control. Our mission from the outset was simple. To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. Building Common Dreams was not easy. Our survival was never guaranteed. When you take on the most powerful forces—Wall Street greed, fossil fuel industry destruction, Big Tech lobbyists, and uber-rich oligarchs who have spent billions upon billions rigging the economy and democracy in their favor—the only bulwark you have is supporters who believe in your work. But here’s the urgent message from me today. It’s never been this bad out there. And it’s never been this hard to keep us going. At the very moment Common Dreams is most needed and doing some of its best and most important work, the threats we face are intensifying. Right now, with just four days to go in our Spring Campaign, we are not even halfway to our goal. When everyone does the little they can afford, we are strong. But if that support retreats or dries up, so do we. Can you make a gift right now to make sure Common Dreams not only survives but thrives? There is no backup plan or rainy day fund. There is only you. —Craig Brown, Co-founder |

Abused by a minority Republican party unyielding in its strategy to block any progressive legislation with which they disagree, critics say Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid's failure to push through a return of the "talking filibuster" crushes most hope for progress on the nation's most pressing problems.
"This country faces major crises in terms of the economy and unemployment, the deficit, global warming, health care, campaign finance reform, education and a crumbling infrastructure," said Senator Bernie Sanders (I-VT), explaining why he voted against the measure's weak provisions.
"In my view, none of these problems will be effectively addressed so long as one senator can demand 60 votes to pass legislation. The rule changes adopted today ... are not enough."
Democratic Senator Tom Harkin of Iowa went on record to say that the meager reforms will make passage of meaningful legislation in the Senate nearly impossible.
Harkin told reporters: "I said to President Obama back in August ... and I said to him the night before the election, I said to him, 'Look, if you get reelected, if we don't do something significant about filibuster reform, you might as well take a four-year vacation,'"
"This is not significant," Harkin added.
Adam Green, co-founder of the Progressive Change Campaign Committee, whose members had pushed for stronger reforms called the Senate's decision one "based on fear." The rules passed, he said, "will ultimately hurt millions of people who would have been helped by progressive bills that Republicans are sure to filibuster."
A group called Fix the Senate Now, which also rallied behind stronger measures, called the result a "missed an opportunity to restore accountability and deliberation to the Senate, while not raising the costs of obstruction."
"The incremental 'reforms' in the agreement do not go nearly far enough to deliver meaningful change," the group said.
Digby, political blogger at the Campaign for America's Future, summed up the deal by saying: "Better than nothing, but still not much. The story of our time."
And others put the focus directly on Reid, who had once threatened to exert all efforts and use all options at his disposal to see the strong changes enacted.
"My friend Harry Reid, the senator from Searchlight, NV, has gone missing in the fight for filibuster reform," said Common Cause President Bob Edgar. "The deal he and Sen. McConnell have struck allows individual senators to continue blocking debate and action by the entire body and to do so without explaining themselves to their colleagues or the American people. This is not the Senate of debate and deliberation our founders envisioned."
Senator Sanders seemed to agree with Edgar's last sentiment. In his closing floor statement, Sanders told his fellow Senators and those watching:
Most Americans grew up believing that in America the majority rules. That is not the case in the Senate.
For many years now, especially since President Obama has been in office, it has taken 60 votes to pass any significant piece of legislation. When Lyndon Johnson was majority leader in the 1950s, he filed cloture to end a filibuster only once. Majority Leader Reid has filed cloture 390 times.
The Senate is not the House and the minority party must be treated with respect and given the opportunity to offer amendments and make their case in opposition. A minority must not, however, be allowed to permanently obstruct the wishes of the majority. That is not democracy. That is a perversion of democracy.
In my view, if a senator or a group of senators are strenuously opposed to legislation they have the right and duty to come to the floor and, for as long as they want, engage in a talking filibuster by explaining to the American people the reasons for their objection. They should not, however, continue to have the right to abuse arcane Senate rules to block a majority of senators from acting on behalf of the American people.
And yet, it appears, that is exactly what they'll get the opportunity to do.

Abused by a minority Republican party unyielding in its strategy to block any progressive legislation with which they disagree, critics say Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid's failure to push through a return of the "talking filibuster" crushes most hope for progress on the nation's most pressing problems.
"This country faces major crises in terms of the economy and unemployment, the deficit, global warming, health care, campaign finance reform, education and a crumbling infrastructure," said Senator Bernie Sanders (I-VT), explaining why he voted against the measure's weak provisions.
"In my view, none of these problems will be effectively addressed so long as one senator can demand 60 votes to pass legislation. The rule changes adopted today ... are not enough."
Democratic Senator Tom Harkin of Iowa went on record to say that the meager reforms will make passage of meaningful legislation in the Senate nearly impossible.
Harkin told reporters: "I said to President Obama back in August ... and I said to him the night before the election, I said to him, 'Look, if you get reelected, if we don't do something significant about filibuster reform, you might as well take a four-year vacation,'"
"This is not significant," Harkin added.
Adam Green, co-founder of the Progressive Change Campaign Committee, whose members had pushed for stronger reforms called the Senate's decision one "based on fear." The rules passed, he said, "will ultimately hurt millions of people who would have been helped by progressive bills that Republicans are sure to filibuster."
A group called Fix the Senate Now, which also rallied behind stronger measures, called the result a "missed an opportunity to restore accountability and deliberation to the Senate, while not raising the costs of obstruction."
"The incremental 'reforms' in the agreement do not go nearly far enough to deliver meaningful change," the group said.
Digby, political blogger at the Campaign for America's Future, summed up the deal by saying: "Better than nothing, but still not much. The story of our time."
And others put the focus directly on Reid, who had once threatened to exert all efforts and use all options at his disposal to see the strong changes enacted.
"My friend Harry Reid, the senator from Searchlight, NV, has gone missing in the fight for filibuster reform," said Common Cause President Bob Edgar. "The deal he and Sen. McConnell have struck allows individual senators to continue blocking debate and action by the entire body and to do so without explaining themselves to their colleagues or the American people. This is not the Senate of debate and deliberation our founders envisioned."
Senator Sanders seemed to agree with Edgar's last sentiment. In his closing floor statement, Sanders told his fellow Senators and those watching:
Most Americans grew up believing that in America the majority rules. That is not the case in the Senate.
For many years now, especially since President Obama has been in office, it has taken 60 votes to pass any significant piece of legislation. When Lyndon Johnson was majority leader in the 1950s, he filed cloture to end a filibuster only once. Majority Leader Reid has filed cloture 390 times.
The Senate is not the House and the minority party must be treated with respect and given the opportunity to offer amendments and make their case in opposition. A minority must not, however, be allowed to permanently obstruct the wishes of the majority. That is not democracy. That is a perversion of democracy.
In my view, if a senator or a group of senators are strenuously opposed to legislation they have the right and duty to come to the floor and, for as long as they want, engage in a talking filibuster by explaining to the American people the reasons for their objection. They should not, however, continue to have the right to abuse arcane Senate rules to block a majority of senators from acting on behalf of the American people.
And yet, it appears, that is exactly what they'll get the opportunity to do.

