# Senate ends the filibuster for executive and judicial nominees **URL:** \ **Category:** In My Humble Opinion\ **Created:** [November 21, 2013, 6:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/senate-ends-the-filibuster-for-executive-and-judicial-nominees/674458 "2013-11-21T18:44:31Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![MOIDALIZE](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/e274bd/32.png) [@MOIDALIZE](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MOIDALIZE)\ **Post date:** [November 21, 2013, 6:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/senate-ends-the-filibuster-for-executive-and-judicial-nominees/674458/1 "2013-11-21T18:44:31Z")
[Finally.](http://talkingpointsmemo.com/dc/harry-reid-nuclear-option-senate) I guess there’s something to be said for the power of tradition, because I don’t know what took the Democrats so long. It should have been clear last year, at the latest, that Senate Republicans weren’t going to allow the President to govern. ---
**Author:** ![Falchion](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/a88e57/32.png) [@Falchion](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Falchion)\ **Post date:** [November 21, 2013, 6:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/senate-ends-the-filibuster-for-executive-and-judicial-nominees/674458/2 "2013-11-21T18:49:22Z")
> [@MOIDALIZE](#): > > [Finally.](http://talkingpointsmemo.com/dc/harry-reid-nuclear-option-senate) > > I guess there’s something to be said for the power of tradition, because I don’t know what took the Democrats so long. It should have been clear last year, at the latest, that Senate Republicans weren’t going to allow the President to govern. Good news for Justice Estrada. ---
**Author:** ![QuickSilver](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/quicksilver/32/7832_2.png) [@QuickSilver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/QuickSilver)\ **Post date:** [November 21, 2013, 6:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/senate-ends-the-filibuster-for-executive-and-judicial-nominees/674458/3 "2013-11-21T18:52:51Z")
\ And that’s how you do that. You’re welcome. \ ---
**Author:** ![Munch](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/munch/32/5281_2.png) [@Munch](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Munch)\ **Post date:** [November 21, 2013, 7:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/senate-ends-the-filibuster-for-executive-and-judicial-nominees/674458/4 "2013-11-21T19:04:22Z")
> [@](#): > > Earlier this summer, during the previous filibuster fight that ended without a rules change, the Republican leader warned that if Reid ends the filibuster for nominations, he would end the filibuster for everything, including legislation, if he becomes majority leader. Am I correct in my understanding that “the filibuster” that was just eliminated is just a bullshit procedural vote, and not an actual “Mr. Smith Goes to Washington” stand at your desk and yammer on and on while your bladder explodes sort of filibuster? That if a Senator who truly opposes a particular nomination, he or she can still engage in a filibuster (a real one, not this bullshit procedural crap)? ---
**Author:** ![MOIDALIZE](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/e274bd/32.png) [@MOIDALIZE](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MOIDALIZE)\ **Post date:** [November 21, 2013, 7:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/senate-ends-the-filibuster-for-executive-and-judicial-nominees/674458/5 "2013-11-21T19:17:48Z")
> [@Munch](#): > > Am I correct in my understanding that “the filibuster” that was just eliminated is just a bullshit procedural vote, and not an actual “Mr. Smith Goes to Washington” stand at your desk and yammer on and on while your bladder explodes sort of filibuster? That if a Senator who truly opposes a particular nomination, he or she can still engage in a filibuster (a real one, not this bullshit procedural crap)? Cloture ends any filibuster. Prior to today, you needed 60 votes for cloture, which means you had to present a motion, assemble the votes, then wait a couple days for some reason. Thus, because of Republican intransigence, if there weren’t 60 votes for whatever business was before the Senate, then the matter would simply come to an end without anyone having to take the floor and read from the dictionary. Now, at least with regards to executive and judicial nominees (other than SCOTUS nominees), only a simple majority is required, which the Democrats have. No requirement to have 60 votes just to be able to cast 50 votes. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [November 21, 2013, 7:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/senate-ends-the-filibuster-for-executive-and-judicial-nominees/674458/6 "2013-11-21T19:27:26Z")
> [@Munch](#): > > Am I correct in my understanding that “the filibuster” that was just eliminated is just a bullshit procedural vote, and not an actual “Mr. Smith Goes to Washington” stand at your desk and yammer on and on while your bladder explodes sort of filibuster? That if a Senator who truly opposes a particular nomination, he or she can still engage in a filibuster (a real one, not this bullshit procedural crap)? You are incorrect. This change eliminates any filibuster, procedural or “actual.” ---
**Author:** ![Folacin](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/folacin/32/3195_2.png) [@Folacin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Folacin)\ **Post date:** [November 21, 2013, 7:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/senate-ends-the-filibuster-for-executive-and-judicial-nominees/674458/7 "2013-11-21T19:28:16Z")
> [@Munch](#): > > Am I correct in my understanding that “the filibuster” that was just eliminated is just a bullshit procedural vote, and not an actual “Mr. Smith Goes to Washington” stand at your desk and yammer on and on while your bladder explodes sort of filibuster? That if a Senator who truly opposes a particular nomination, he or she can still engage in a filibuster (a real one, not this bullshit procedural crap)? I don’t think so - from my reading, this eliminates any form of filibuster for judicial and executive branch nominees (but possibly not Supreme Court justices). The bull-shittiness of the current filibuster was never a real issue. My understanding is that both sides liked that bit - the filibusterers because they didn’t have to talk for hours and hours, the anti-filibusters because they don’t have to maintain a quorum on the Senate floor listening to the telephone book being read (recall the scene in “Mr Smith” where everyone walks out, and ol’ Jeff gets them all called back in. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [November 21, 2013, 7:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/senate-ends-the-filibuster-for-executive-and-judicial-nominees/674458/8 "2013-11-21T19:28:39Z")
> [@MOIDALIZE](#): > > Cloture ends any filibuster. Prior to today, you needed 60 votes for cloture, which means you had to present a motion, assemble the votes, then wait a couple days for some reason. Thus, because of Republican intransigence, if there weren’t 60 votes for whatever business was before the Senate, then the matter would simply come to an end without anyone having to take the floor and read from the dictionary. > > Now, at least with regards to executive and judicial nominees (other than SCOTUS nominees), only a simple majority is required, which the Democrats have. No requirement to have 60 votes just to be able to cast 50 votes. And I favor this move. I favored it when the GOP was in charge, i favor it now that it’s happened with the Democrats in charge, and I will continue to favor it when the GOP is again in charge. ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [November 21, 2013, 7:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/senate-ends-the-filibuster-for-executive-and-judicial-nominees/674458/9 "2013-11-21T19:34:11Z")
It’s too bad the Democrats didn’t do this a year ago, but it’s better late than never. > [@Folacin](#): > > I don’t think so - from my reading, this eliminates any form of filibuster for judicial and executive branch nominees (but possibly not Supreme Court justices). It definitely doesn’t include Supreme Court justices. But no Supreme Court justice has been filibustered. > [@](#): > > The bull-shittiness of the current filibuster was never a real issue. Right. I still think it’s dumb that anyone cares about that part. What matters is that this procedural tool was being abused, and now that won’t happen as much. ---
**Author:** ![Falchion](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/a88e57/32.png) [@Falchion](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Falchion)\ **Post date:** [November 21, 2013, 7:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/senate-ends-the-filibuster-for-executive-and-judicial-nominees/674458/10 "2013-11-21T19:39:10Z")
> [@Marley23](#): > > It’s too bad the Democrats didn’t do this a year ago, but it’s better late than never. It’s really just too bad that they didn’t do it back in 2003 when the whole thing started. But better late than never. > [@](#): > > But no Supreme Court justice has been filibustered. Except Abe Fortas… although that’s controversial, apparently. ---
**Author:** ![Munch](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/munch/32/5281_2.png) [@Munch](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Munch)\ **Post date:** [November 21, 2013, 7:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/senate-ends-the-filibuster-for-executive-and-judicial-nominees/674458/11 "2013-11-21T19:40:43Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > You are incorrect. This change eliminates any filibuster, procedural or “actual.” That’s too bad. I also favored cloture, but still want some way for a physical filibuster to still exist. Oh well - this is far better than the alternative. ---
**Author:** ![DoctorJ](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/doctorj/32/2904_2.png) [@DoctorJ](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DoctorJ)\ **Post date:** [November 21, 2013, 7:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/senate-ends-the-filibuster-for-executive-and-judicial-nominees/674458/12 "2013-11-21T19:53:59Z")
It had to happen. The Republicans are almost certain to take back the Senate in 2014 and there’s no way they weren’t going to do this on day one anyway. Better to just do it now and at least get those open judicial slots filled. ---
**Author:** ![Folacin](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/folacin/32/3195_2.png) [@Folacin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Folacin)\ **Post date:** [November 21, 2013, 8:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/senate-ends-the-filibuster-for-executive-and-judicial-nominees/674458/13 "2013-11-21T20:13:12Z")
> [@DoctorJ](#): > > It had to happen. The Republicans are almost certain to take back the Senate in 2014 and there’s no way they weren’t going to do this on day one anyway. Better to just do it now and at least get those open judicial slots filled. Hopefully Obama will get off his ass and actually start nominating people. He’s faced unreasonable levels of obstructionism, but hasn’t helped himself by not getting names to the Senate for approval. Of course, most of them would likely have been filibustered, but then he could have forced this crisis to occur earlier. ---
**Author:** ![TonySinclair](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/49beb7/32.png) [@TonySinclair](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TonySinclair)\ **Post date:** [November 21, 2013, 8:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/senate-ends-the-filibuster-for-executive-and-judicial-nominees/674458/14 "2013-11-21T20:22:50Z")
And of course, every mainstream news report I’ve heard about this change is gleefully mining ten year old quotes from Dems who were against it when the Pubs had the majority, with absolutely no hint that the Pubs have since made the filibuster the norm, rather than the exception. ---
**Author:** ![That\_Don\_Guy](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/that_don_guy/32/538_2.png) [@That\_Don\_Guy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/That_Don_Guy)\ **Post date:** [November 21, 2013, 8:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/senate-ends-the-filibuster-for-executive-and-judicial-nominees/674458/15 "2013-11-21T20:27:50Z")
> [@DoctorJ](#): > > It had to happen. The Republicans are almost certain to take back the Senate in 2014 and there’s no way they weren’t going to do this on day one anyway. Better to just do it now and at least get those open judicial slots filled. What stops the Senate from meeting on, say, January 2 and voting (a) to go back to the old rule, and (b) to require a 2/3 vote to change the Senate rule that allowed them to change this rule with a majority vote in the first place? ---
**Author:** ![MOIDALIZE](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/e274bd/32.png) [@MOIDALIZE](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MOIDALIZE)\ **Post date:** [November 21, 2013, 8:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/senate-ends-the-filibuster-for-executive-and-judicial-nominees/674458/16 "2013-11-21T20:27:58Z")
> [@TonySinclair](#): > > And of course, every mainstream news report I’ve heard about this change is gleefully mining ten year old quotes from Dems who were against it when the Pubs had the majority, with absolutely no hint that the Pubs have since made the filibuster the norm, rather than the exception. Or as the NYT put it: > [@](#): > > Senate Democrats are on the verge of moving to eliminate the use of the filibuster against most presidential nominees, aides and senior party leaders said Wednesday, a move that would deprive Republicans of their ability to block President Obama’s picks for cabinet posts and the federal judiciary and further erode what little bipartisanship still exists in the Senate. > **[Senate Democrats Poised to Block Filibusters of Presidential Picks (Published...](https://www.nytimes.com/2013/11/21/us/politics/senate-democrats-poised-to-block-filibusters-of-presidential-picks.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0)** > > A vote on what is known on Capitol Hill as the “nuclear option” would further erode what little bipartisanship exists in the Senate. Bipartisanship? Bipartisanship?!! ---
**Author:** ![Falchion](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/a88e57/32.png) [@Falchion](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Falchion)\ **Post date:** [November 21, 2013, 8:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/senate-ends-the-filibuster-for-executive-and-judicial-nominees/674458/17 "2013-11-21T20:42:16Z")
> [@TonySinclair](#): > > And of course, every mainstream news report I’ve heard about this change is gleefully mining ten year old quotes from Dems who were against it when the Pubs had the majority, with absolutely no hint that the Pubs have since made the filibuster the norm, rather than the exception. During the Bush Administration, there were (I believe) 10 nominations blocked by filibuster (5 revisited as part of a compromise). Bush had a confirmation rate of something like 67%. Obama (at the end of the first term) had a rate of 70%, I believe, with 2 filibusters. Add to that the additional 3 D.C. Circuit nominations (which implicate a number of other factors than simple resistance). On what basis do we conclude that the evil “Pubs” are filibustering judicial nominations at a substantially higher rate than before? (It is true, of course, that since the Reagan administration, I believe, the confirmation rate has been decreasing, with the slight uptick for Obama a break in the trend). > [@MOIDALIZE](#): > > Or as the NYT put it: Or as the President put it: > [@](#): > > What [the American people] don’t expect is for one party - be it Republican or Democrat - to change the rules in the middle of the game so that they can make all the decisions while the other party is told to sit down and keep quiet. The American people want less partisanship in this town, but everyone in this chamber knows that if the majority chooses to end the filibuster - if they choose to change the rules and put an end to democratic debate - then the fighting and the bitterness and the gridlock will only get worse. ---
**Author:** ![Iggy](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iggy/32/3364_2.png) [@Iggy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Iggy)\ **Post date:** [November 21, 2013, 8:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/senate-ends-the-filibuster-for-executive-and-judicial-nominees/674458/18 "2013-11-21T20:47:46Z")
> [@That\_Don\_Guy](#): > > What stops the Senate from meeting on, say, January 2 and voting (a) to go back to the old rule, and (b) to require a 2/3 vote to change the Senate rule that allowed them to change this rule with a majority vote in the first place? Nothing. The Senate sets its own rules, per the Constitution. It will now be interesting to see how this expands. If Dems can eliminate the filibuster on issues that they consider important then what is to stop the Repubs from doing the same? ---
**Author:** ![Terr](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/839c29/32.png) [@Terr](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Terr)\ **Post date:** [November 21, 2013, 8:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/senate-ends-the-filibuster-for-executive-and-judicial-nominees/674458/19 "2013-11-21T20:50:13Z")
> [@That\_Don\_Guy](#): > > What stops the Senate from meeting on, say, January 2 and voting (a) to go back to the old rule, and (b) to require a 2/3 vote to change the Senate rule that allowed them to change this rule with a majority vote in the first place? Because the Senate can later use a simple majority to change the rule that requires a 2/3 vote to change the Senate rule that allowed them to change this rule with a majority vote. ---
**Author:** ![etv78](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/d78d45/32.png) [@etv78](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/etv78)\ **Post date:** [November 21, 2013, 8:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/senate-ends-the-filibuster-for-executive-and-judicial-nominees/674458/20 "2013-11-21T20:51:16Z")
Both houses set their rules (from scratch I believe) on the 1st day of the legislative calendar. [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/senate-ends-the-filibuster-for-executive-and-judicial-nominees/674458.md?page=2)