Just remember that it only requires 60 votes if the GOP doesn't overrule the Parliamentarian which they can do easily and without consequence.
Replies
Respectfully: what is this reminder *for*? They may very well do it, but they might not, and they certainly won’t have to if dems defect. Is there a course of action being suggested here besides “lose faith in the simple, material action requested in the thread rather than take it”?
jun 30, 2025, 12:47 pm • 27 0 • view
With equal respect: I think the focus on the Parl is giving ppl false hope. The Parl will not stop this bill. Calling senators is fine but if the bill is to be stopped, it will need 4 GOP senators to vote No. OR - and this is where I think ppl should focus - 4 House members to vote No. 1/2
jun 30, 2025, 1:47 pm • 5 0 • view
If I had my way, everyone would focus on the House like a laser beam. And they wouldn't just call, they'd get new ppl to call every day. That's critical - the number of calls has to increase every day and the calls have to come from new ppl. 1/2+1 more
jun 30, 2025, 1:49 pm • 6 0 • view
Call the Senate too, but the House is where there's a chance. It's vanishingly small but it's a chance.
jun 30, 2025, 1:50 pm • 4 0 • view
It’s not necessarily without consequent Overruling the parliamentarian is basically nuking the filibuster. Any future Democrat administration could pass anything with a simple majority
jun 30, 2025, 4:29 pm • 2 0 • view
This would necessitate democrats having spines
jun 30, 2025, 5:09 pm • 5 0 • view
And having goals that don't align with the GOP in large part.
jun 30, 2025, 5:15 pm • 2 0 • view
It’s not about spines, once the filibuster is nuked even spineless democrats are going to bring it back
jun 30, 2025, 6:07 pm • 0 0 • view
Aren’t*
jun 30, 2025, 6:08 pm • 0 0 • view
I hear you but I don't think the GOP is worried about (or even should worry about) the future. Right now, they can overrule the Parliamentarian without meaningful consequence. The future will take care of itself. So many of their goals are w/in reach. I don't see them letting norms get in the way.
jun 30, 2025, 5:14 pm • 0 0 • view
If they weren’t worried about that why even do budget reconciliation? Why amend other stuff the parliamentarian ruled against to get her to let it through? Just nuke the filibuster. For now they are not indicating they will take that step.
jun 30, 2025, 6:06 pm • 1 0 • view
They're using rec b/c they don't have the 60 votes to move it otherwise. They haven't fixed all the stuff the Parliamentarian flagged: www.budget.senate.gov/ranking-memb... My guess is that they won't. We'll see what happens.
jun 30, 2025, 6:28 pm • 0 0 • view
They don’t need 60 votes if they nuke the filibuster. Nuking the filibuster and ignoring the parliamentarian are functionally equivalent. The only functional difference is budget reconciliation is much more restrictive due to the Byrd rule. And ignoring the parliamentarian is throwing Byrd rule
jun 30, 2025, 7:02 pm • 1 0 • view
They’re now at the point where they start raising points of order to challenge stuff as violating the Byrd rule. If they decide to go essentially nuclear that will be a big step so we’ll see.
jun 30, 2025, 7:03 pm • 0 0 • view
But that's what I'm saying. They will not pay that price. They'll ignore the Parl. They'll have the presiding officer of the senate make the decision (that's kosher) and they'll move on with rec.
jun 30, 2025, 7:44 pm • 0 0 • view
Going nuclear is also “kosher”. And there’s no difference between that and ignoring the parliamentarian. What stops democrats from passing anything they want when they are in charge and having the officer of the senate make the decision then? It’s just a shared agreement not to do that
jun 30, 2025, 11:32 pm • 0 0 • view
Republicans will pay the price if they ignore the parliamentarian or go nuclear unless they’re counting on having Trump serve as king for eternity. And right now they don’t seem interested in putting all their eggs in that basket.
jun 30, 2025, 11:34 pm • 0 0 • view