Falling short of the "60 votes needed to end debate," $410 billion dollars needed to continue most government functions is in jeopardy. Most in the GOP, such as Senator John McCain, claim that the spending bill is ripe with "earmarks" (a term still under debate) and have refused to support the measure. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid said he will allow Republicans until Monday to change their votes to ensure the government has the funds necessary to function.We must begin to ask ourselves "what is the strategy here?" After witnessing what occurred with the stimulus project, the strength of the majority party is obvious, and the weakness of the minority has been emphasized. The GOP seems to be gearing up for a strong fight against the ruling Democrats. The strategy seems to be hoping that all Democratic measures fail, and will put up enough stalling in an effort to say to the electorate "we told you so" in the event that the majority party's agenda does not succeed. There is a much better way to proclaim that the majority party is not in line with the needs of the people: a classic Senate filibuster.
Bring out the cots, and let the real debate begin. If the GOP is serious about showing the American people they disagree with Democratic policies, they should round themselves up and attempt to filibuster any legislation that does not get 60 votes. This would certainly display their disagreement in the most effective manner.
When considering the classic filibuster, let us ask:
- If the GOP is serious about stalling the Democratic agenda, why not let the people see how committed they really are to such an act?
- Should the Republicans filibuster? Why or why not?
- Would an attempted filibuster by the GOP favor themselves, or their rivals?
No comments:
Post a Comment