Mark N. said: The Republicans were more hardline about making the Democrats actually get up and filibuster a bill if they said they were going to, and even threatened the “nuclear option” of ditching filibusters entirely. Reid, by contrast, seems happy to simply count a threat of filibuster as decisive, and back down without making people get out on the floor for 60 hours reading phone books.

I think this is not quite right. Ryan Grim wrote a piece for the Huffington Post addressing this very question. He reported, among other things:

Reid’s office has studied the history of the filibuster and analyzed what options are available. The resulting memo was provided to the Huffington Post and it concludes that a filibustering Senator “can be forced to sit on the [Senate] floor to keep us from voting on that legislation for a finite period of time according to existing rules but he/she can’t be forced to keep talking for an indefinite period of time.”

Bob Dove, who worked as a Senate parliamentarian from 1966 until 2001, knows Senate rules as well as anyone on the planet. The Reid analysis, he says, is “exactly correct.”

To get an idea of what the scene would look like on the Senate floor if Democrats tried to force Republicans to talk out a filibuster, turn on C-SPAN on any given Saturday. Hear the classical music? See the blue carpet behind the “Quorum Call” logo? That would be the resulting scene if Democrats forced a filibuster and the GOP chose not to play along.

The memo is attached at the end of the piece. Maybe there are parliamentary experts on this comments board who would disagree, but I am taking Grim’s word for it, for now.

Sorry to hear you have amnesia about all political events prior to 2001. Hope you get some help for that.

Frankly, I argued THEN that while I had no problems with filibusters for legislation, they should be disallowed for confirmations. I still believe that, though the old goose/gander thing does spring to mind when I hear complaints about Republican filibuster threats.

When does this stop? This good for the goose/ gander belief I think is wrong.

Republicans are way more political than Democrats.

When did the Democrats ever, I mean ever use the attorney general’s office for politics (Bush investigating Democrats to tarnish them during election campaigns, firing AG who don’t aggressivly investigate Democrats) It’s all politics with Republicans..everything…Nominations (Dawn Johnson), Bills(Healthcare), Presidential Announcements on anything(Obama addressing kids in school like Reagan and Bush did).

It never stops. Never. And, this is why it’s taking so god damn long to vet these candidates.

Not a single god damn Republican was arguing against Bush’s tax cut even though Bush tax cuts were responsible for 51% of the mushrooming federal deficit.

Now, every one is a deficit hawk.

Joe: And, these days, a threat — if the votes are there — is enough. There is no need for a full-fledged filibuster.

That seems to be the Democratic leadership’s own fault, really. The Republicans were more hardline about making the Democrats actually get up and filibuster a bill if they said they were going to, and even threatened the “nuclear option” of ditching filibusters entirely. Reid, by contrast, seems happy to simply count a threat of filibuster as decisive, and back down without making people get out on the floor for 60 hours reading phone books.

I didn’t say “this year.”

Putting aside the stimulus bill, sure, since they only have forty votes now. But, the Dems have been in the majority since 2006. From 2006-9, there were various actions, including related to the war sponsored by a former Secretary of the Reagan Administration, blocked because of Republican filibusters.

And, these days, a threat — if the votes are there — is enough. There is no need for a full-fledged filibuster.

I don’t remember that many filibusters that have been waged by the Republicans against legislation this year. I have heard of threats of filibusters, but that is not the same thing.

True enough if “just” doesn’t mean in the same number of cases. I don’t recall the many pieces of legislation blocked by Dems when the Republicans were in the majority akin to those by the Republican minority.

Sure, the Dems filibustered certain times. BTW, if filibusters are used, life time appointments would be one of the most legitimate uses. Ditto, probably for certain specific appointments that might disproportionately effect certain regions. Senatorial courtesy is a tradition that reflects this principle.

The Republicans are making unprecedentedly frequent use of filibuster threats, just as the Democrats did during the Bush Administration.

Fixed it for you.

Frankly, I argued THEN that while I had no problems with filibusters for legislation, they should be disallowed for confirmations. I still believe that, though the old goose/gander thing does spring to mind when I hear complaints about Republican filibuster threats.

(Speaking of which, what’s up with that? Why is that confirmation taking so long?)

Isn’t everything taking a long time in this administration? Nominations, his Afghanistan policy, plus lots of parts of his legislative agenda, including simple ones like DADT. And even with high priority items like health care, the administration hasn’t been proactive, instead allowing Congress to run with it.

Because the Senate is a hyperpartisan gridlocked morass in which a single Senator can secretly block almost anything (and many do), and in which the Republicans are making unprecedentedly frequent use of filibuster threats, which slows down everything in general, and tends to push nominations to the bottom of pile, in addition to slowing down the actual nominations (making sure that 60 senators will vote for cloture, which is difficult given Republican bloc voting, even when the subsequent vote on the substance is often not close at all.)

Another edition of SASQ.

It all politics.

CDU: Yeah, but Jack Bauer would be an even more interesting choice.

Or Gary Bauer. At least Gary’s a lawyer!

Bob Bauer is an election lawyer — i.e., a technical election-law expert

Maybe Obama really is worried about his birth certificate ;-)

The new White House Counsel? Bob Bauer.

Richard Riley: Interesting.

Yeah, but Jack Bauer would be an even more interesting choice.