The Biden Presidency

calodo2003

Flaming Full Member
Joined
Feb 8, 2014
Messages
41,815
Location
Florida
Democrats control both houses. What they do or don't get done is entirely up to them.
You said not that long ago that they won’t be able to get that much done due to the Democrat centrists in the Senate.

Can’t have it both ways now.
 

Frosty

Logical and sensible but turns women gay
Joined
Jan 11, 2007
Messages
17,243
Location
Yes I can hear you Clem Fandango!
They control both houses now after winning the senate runoffs in Georgia.
You need 60 votes in the Senate to deal with the minority filibuster that McConnell used so expertly to hold up Obama's legislative agenda. Which is why workarounds like budget reconciliation become so important.
 

WI_Red

Redcafes Most Rested
Joined
May 20, 2018
Messages
12,138
Location
No longer in WI
Supports
Atlanta United
You need 60 votes in the Senate to deal with the minority filibuster that McConnell used so expertly to hold up Obama's legislative agenda. Which is why workarounds like budget reconciliation become so important.
Blah Blah, stop with your facts. If Biden doesn't do everything he promised its his fault.
 

DOTA

wants Amber Rudd to call him a naughty boy
Joined
Jul 3, 2012
Messages
24,504
Amazing Grace is one of the most tuneless dreary songs in existence.
 

Eboue

nasty little twerp with crazy bitter-man opinions
Joined
Jun 6, 2011
Messages
61,202
Location
I'm typing this with my Glock 19 two feet from me
You need 60 votes in the Senate to deal with the minority filibuster that McConnell used so expertly to hold up Obama's legislative agenda. Which is why workarounds like budget reconciliation become so important.
Every bill can be a budget bill. Democrats choose not to because it isn't in their interest to wield power and enact the things they claim to want because fundamentally the democratic party exists to fundraise and provide jobs for the children of rich donors.
 

Ainu

Full Member
Joined
Mar 10, 2008
Messages
10,140
Location
Antwerp, Belgium
Good to see some dignity in that office again after the abomination that was the previous term. To say he's facing a monumental challenge would be an understatement. His term has to be a time of healing but with such a divided people that's going to take a lot longer than four years. I sincerely wish him the best of luck.
 

Vidic_In_Moscow

rectum-faced pygmy
Joined
Sep 19, 2010
Messages
19,578
Location
( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)
Supports
i stink
Every bill can be a budget bill. Democrats choose not to because it isn't in their interest to wield power and enact the things they claim to want because fundamentally the democratic party exists to fundraiser and provide jobs for the children of rich donors.
You sound like a white supremacist to me
 

Dudu

Full Member
Joined
Feb 5, 2012
Messages
4,958
Personally thought it was a fantastic speech.

He's got a monumental challenge ahead. Hope he can deliver at least some of it.
 

WI_Red

Redcafes Most Rested
Joined
May 20, 2018
Messages
12,138
Location
No longer in WI
Supports
Atlanta United
Every bill can be a budget bill. Democrats choose not to because it isn't in their interest to wield power and enact the things they claim to want because fundamentally the democratic party exists to fundraiser and provide jobs for the children of rich donors.
You can only do one budget reconciliation bill a year. One.
 

Frosty

Logical and sensible but turns women gay
Joined
Jan 11, 2007
Messages
17,243
Location
Yes I can hear you Clem Fandango!
Joe Manchin is a democrat in good standing. The filibuster is a senate rule that can be amended by the senate. The same senate which democrats control
Afraid it is not that easy: https://www.brookings.edu/policy202...uster-and-what-would-it-take-to-eliminate-it/

The most straightforward way to eliminate the filibuster would be to formally change the text of Senate Rule 22, the cloture rule that requires 60 votes to end debate on legislation. Here’s the catch: Ending debate on a resolution to change the Senate’s standing rules requires the support of two-thirds of the members present and voting.


A more complicated, but more likely, way to ban the filibuster would be to create a new Senate precedent. The chamber’s precedents exist alongside its formal rules to provide additional insight into how and when its rules have been applied in particular ways. Importantly, this approach to curtailing the filibuster—colloquially known as the “nuclear option” and more formally as “reform by ruling”—can, in certain circumstances, be employed with support from only a simple majority of senators.

The nuclear option leverages the fact that a new precedent can be created by a senator raising a point of order, or claiming that a Senate rule is being violated. If the presiding officer (typically a member of the Senate) agrees, that ruling establishes a new precedent. If the presiding officer disagrees, another senator can appeal the ruling of the chair. If a majority of the Senate votes to reverse the decision of the chair, then the opposite of the chair’s ruling becomes the new precedent.

In both 2013 and 2017, the Senate used this approach to reduce the number of votes needed to end debate on nominations. The majority leader used two non-debatable motions to bring up the relevant nominations, and then raised a point of order that the vote on cloture is by majority vote. The presiding officer ruled against the point of order, but his ruling was overturned on appeal—which, again, required only a majority in support. In sum, by following the right steps in a particular parliamentary circumstance, a simple majority of senators can establish a new interpretation of a Senate rule.

And Manchin has already said he doesn't want the filibuster to end, so unless you get a Romney or a Sasse onside, it is here to stay.