Posted by Kromey at 7:42pm Apr 12 '10If the Senate leadership wanted to push the issue on a "filibustered" item, there's nothing forcing them to dual-track -- they could simply bring the legislation to the floor, which would require the Senator(s) wishing to block it to stand up, take the floor, and begin speaking ad nauseam to stop it. They would be forced to filibuster like they had to in the "good ol' days".
In other words, the "modern filibuster" requires the complicity of both the minority and the majority parties. In fact, one could argue that the Senate majority is more complicit in allowing legislation under threat of filibuster to just quietly languish on the sidelines -- the Senate leader decides when a bill is heard on the floor, and likewise the Senate leader decides when to "dual-track" a bill so something else can be heard.
What it comes down to is that the GOP, which allegedly (I haven't tried to verify nor refute this claim, just seen it repeated numerous times) has been the most egregious in terms of abusing the threat of the filibuster, is not having their bluff called by a Democratic party that for all intents and purposes appears utterly cowardly in the face of a threatened filibuster. Threatening a filibuster is only an "I win" button if the Senate majority takes the coward's option to simply back down at the slightest hint of a threat.
In other words, the "modern filibuster" requires the complicity of both the minority and the majority parties. In fact, one could argue that the Senate majority is more complicit in allowing legislation under threat of filibuster to just quietly languish on the sidelines -- the Senate leader decides when a bill is heard on the floor, and likewise the Senate leader decides when to "dual-track" a bill so something else can be heard.
What it comes down to is that the GOP, which allegedly (I haven't tried to verify nor refute this claim, just seen it repeated numerous times) has been the most egregious in terms of abusing the threat of the filibuster, is not having their bluff called by a Democratic party that for all intents and purposes appears utterly cowardly in the face of a threatened filibuster. Threatening a filibuster is only an "I win" button if the Senate majority takes the coward's option to simply back down at the slightest hint of a threat.
That's not entirely accurate - Kromey