US Bipartisan Battles Raise Concerns for the World
In support of President Obama’s nominations, the Democratic-controlled Senate has passed a law to lower the number of votes required to block a filibuster. This would prevent the minority Republican Party from objecting to, or holding up, any presidential nominations. This maneuver has caused great dissatisfaction within the Republican Party and may exacerbate already fierce bipartisan battles. Issues like the debt ceiling, government spending and Obamacare will again become “hostages” to the partisan struggle, causing national unrest in the U.S., as well as the rest of the world.
Since the mid-19th century, the minority party in the Senate has used the regulation that there will be “no restrictions” on time periods for speaking to execute a filibuster, utilizing the following tactics: Going through endless question and answer sessions, rewording what the last person said, and delaying and usurping voting time so that there is insufficient time to decide on the president’s nominations or proposals and the discussion must be postponed. To prevent all kinds of filibusters from slowing down or stopping the efficacy of discussions, the Senate created a system of “cloture” in 1917, so that if 67 members of the 100-person Congress agree, they can put an immediate end to a lengthy debate, ending the filibuster activity. In 1975, the number of votes required to reach the threshold of cloture was reduced to 60. On Nov. 21, at Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid’s proposal, with a vote of 52 to 48, the number of votes required was lowered to 51. This “historic bill” has essentially eliminated the filibuster as a tool from the regulations of discussion. However, the law applies only to presidential nominations of officials and judges. Filibusters against nominations for the highest court, the Supreme Court, as well as filibusters against other bills will still have a 60-vote threshold for cloture.
Currently, the Senate has a backlog of 59 executive officials and 17 judicial officials whose nominations have yet to pass through Congress. Senate Democrats have accused Republicans of abusing the filibuster to obstruct government. Reid has called the Republicans’ actions “sabotage.” Thus far in its history, the Senate has seen a total of 168 filibusters. Of this number, around half were directed at the Obama administration. Changing the filibuster rules was needed to restart the Senate and break the current status quo of political stagnation. Through this change, filibusters will be cut off in a timely way and Obama nominees will be more easily confirmed in Congress.
The fact that this amendment benefits Obama has apparently caused much dissatisfaction among Republicans. Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell has said it was “a blatant power grab” that “strips the rights of the minority.” Republican Senator John McCain said that this move has caused great damage to the Senate proceedings. “If the majority can change the rules, then there are no rules,” the senator said.
U.S. politicians have referred to the Democratic Party’s elimination of the filibuster as the “nuclear option.” Although Senate Republicans can still filibuster any motions to pass a proposal, the end result of these recent events can only be a lose-lose. If the Democratic Party loses control of the Senate and the White House in the future, they will only reap what they have sown. As the U.S. media has said, the two parties’ abuse of the filibuster as a bipartisan tool has damaged Congress’s ability to look beyond party lines to work together.
In any case, this strategy has increased the opposition of the two parties and further strained the relationship. The U.S. continues to face a fierce bipartisan struggle, which has not ceased but only intensified. When the postponed “double crises” of the debt ceiling and fiscal cliff resurface early next year, will the battle erupt again? Will the federal government shut down again? This has been enough to capture the attention and concern of the world.
Since the mid-19th century, the minority party in the Senate has used the regulation that there will be “no restrictions” on time periods for speaking to execute a filibuster, utilizing the following tactics: Going through endless question and answer sessions, rewording what the last person said, and delaying and usurping voting time so that there is insufficient time to decide on the president’s nominations or proposals and the discussion must be postponed. To prevent all kinds of filibusters from slowing down or stopping the efficacy of discussions, the Senate created a system of “cloture” in 1917, so that if 67 members of the 100-person Congress agree, they can put an immediate end to a lengthy debate, ending the filibuster activity. In 1975, the number of votes required to reach the threshold of cloture was reduced to 60. On Nov. 21, at Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid’s proposal, with a vote of 52 to 48, the number of votes required was lowered to 51. This “historic bill” has essentially eliminated the filibuster as a tool from the regulations of discussion. However, the law applies only to presidential nominations of officials and judges. Filibusters against nominations for the highest court, the Supreme Court, as well as filibusters against other bills will still have a 60-vote threshold for cloture.
Currently, the Senate has a backlog of 59 executive officials and 17 judicial officials whose nominations have yet to pass through Congress. Senate Democrats have accused Republicans of abusing the filibuster to obstruct government. Reid has called the Republicans’ actions “sabotage.” Thus far in its history, the Senate has seen a total of 168 filibusters. Of this number, around half were directed at the Obama administration. Changing the filibuster rules was needed to restart the Senate and break the current status quo of political stagnation. Through this change, filibusters will be cut off in a timely way and Obama nominees will be more easily confirmed in Congress.
The fact that this amendment benefits Obama has apparently caused much dissatisfaction among Republicans. Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell has said it was “a blatant power grab” that “strips the rights of the minority.” Republican Senator John McCain said that this move has caused great damage to the Senate proceedings. “If the majority can change the rules, then there are no rules,” the senator said.
U.S. politicians have referred to the Democratic Party’s elimination of the filibuster as the “nuclear option.” Although Senate Republicans can still filibuster any motions to pass a proposal, the end result of these recent events can only be a lose-lose. If the Democratic Party loses control of the Senate and the White House in the future, they will only reap what they have sown. As the U.S. media has said, the two parties’ abuse of the filibuster as a bipartisan tool has damaged Congress’s ability to look beyond party lines to work together.
In any case, this strategy has increased the opposition of the two parties and further strained the relationship. The U.S. continues to face a fierce bipartisan struggle, which has not ceased but only intensified. When the postponed “double crises” of the debt ceiling and fiscal cliff resurface early next year, will the battle erupt again? Will the federal government shut down again? This has been enough to capture the attention and concern of the world.