“The right to extend a debate is never more important than when one party controls both Congress and the White House.
The filibuster serves as a check, on power, preserve our limited government.
For the past several months, the Senate has operated under a nuclear cloud.
As a result of the Senate’s decision..... the majority has threatened to break the Senate rules, violate over 200 years of Senate tradition and impair the ability of Democrats and Republicans to work together on issues of real concern to the American people.
It is astounding that the Majority would precipitate this destructive confrontation," ---- Harry Reid, 2005
"We are on the precipice of a crisis.
A constitutional crisis.
The checks and balances which have been at the core of this republic are about to be evaporated by the nuclear option.
The checks and balances which say that if you get fifty-one percent of the vote you don’t get your way 100% of the time.
It is amazing.
It is almost a temper tantrum.
They want their way every single time and they will change the rules, break the rules, misread the Constitution, so that they will get their way." ---- Charles Shumer, 2005
"The nuclear option, if successful, will turn the Senate into a body that could have its rules broken at any time by a majority of senators unhappy with any position taken by the minority.
If the majority insists on the nuclear option, the senate becomes ipso facto, the House of Representatives where the majority rules supreme.
And the party in power can dominate and control the agenda with absolute power." ---- Dianne Feinstein, 2005
"I’ve never passed a single bill worth talking about that didn’t have as its lead co-sponsor a Republican.
And I don’t know of a single piece of legislation that’s ever been adopted here that didn’t have a Republican and a Democrat as the lead.
That’s because we need to sit down and work with each other.
The rules of this institution have required that.
That’s why we exist.
Why have a bi-cameral legislative body.
Why have two chambers.
What were the framers thinking about two hundred and eighteen years ago?
They understood, Mr. President, that there’s a tyranny of the majority." ---- Christopher Dodd, 2005
"So this President has come to the majority here in the Senate and basically said, 'Change the rules. Do it the way I want it done.'
And I guess there just weren’t very many voices on the other side of the aisle that acted the way previous generations have acted and said, 'Mr. President, we’re with you, we support you, but that’s a bridge too far.
We can’t go there.
You have to restrain yourself, Mr. President.'
The Senate is being asked to turn itself inside out, to ignore the precedent, to ignore the way our system works, the delicate balance we have obtained, that has kept this constitutional system going for the immediate gratification of the present President." ---- Hillary Clinton, 2005
"He hasn’t gotten his way.
And that is now prompting, you know, a change in the Senate rules that really, I think, would change the character of the Senate forever.
And what I worry about would be that essentially you have two chambers, the House and the Senate, but you have simply majoritarian absolute power on either side.
And that’s just not what the Founders intended." ---- Then Senator Barack Obama, 2005
Yesterday, the Obama White House announced that they will go forward with a reconciliation process -- sometimes called the “nuclear option” -- to try and pass their government run healthcare plan in the Senate.
This process circumvents a Republican filibuster and only requires a simple majority vote of 51 rather than 60.
White House Communications Director Dan Pfeiffer said told reporters today that the president's plan is designed for "maximum flexibility," the Washington Post reports.
"The president expects and believes the American people deserve an up or down vote on health care," Pfeiffer said.
"This is designed to provide us maximum flexibility if the opposition decides to take the extraordinary step of filibustering health reform."
If Republicans call a filibuster to stall debate of a bill, it typically takes 60 votes to end the filibuster.
Democrats no longer have a 60-vote majority, so the only other way they could get around a filibuster without any Republican support is through a procedural maneuver called reconciliation.
But, as shown above, virtually all Democrats are against the use of reconciliation.
Aren't they?
“He either flip-flopped or he has a real problem with credibility.” ---- Ari Fleischer
“Arguments of convenience lack integrity and inevitably trip you up.” ---- Donald Rumsfeld
