2 years right?
Nope.
During the 111th Congress (2009-2011) Obama had a Senate with 56-58 DEM Senators, never reaching the 60 votes needed to end a filibuster.
For the remainder of his term the GOP controlled the House.
So he never had a filibuster proof majority.
WW
The more ya know!
I had forgotten that. Did he really wrangle a few republicans to support the ACA? I literally cant remember (and am too lazy to google.)
Interesting- Pelois is pushing hard for a legislative pro-choice carve out. And to do that we would need two more democrat senators to make up for Sinema and Manchin.
Can the dems pick up two more seats in November? I would say the odds are a 1000-1.
…
“It is essential that we protect and expand our pro-choice majorities in the House and Senate in November,” Pelosi said, “so that we can eliminate the filibuster so that we can restore women’s fundamental rights—and freedom for every American.”
Pelosi is rarely this blunt about eliminating the filibuster. More often she’ll dismiss questions about Senate rules, saying that the Senate’s business is the Senate’s business. These comments are indicative of a shift in the last few days from Democrats who recognize that vague exhortations to “vote in November!” needed to get a little sharper. (They weren’t landing that great with the populace.)
The new directive is: We just need two more senators to make your dreams come true.
“Give us two more Senate seats and we will make abortion legal nationwide as a matter of federal statutory law,” Hawaii Sen. Brian Schatz tweeted on Monday.
“What we must do is elect two more Democratic pro-choice senators who are willing to overturn the filibuster or at a minimum carve out important exceptions to protect our rights,” Washington Rep. Pramila Jayapal, chairwoman of the Congressional Progressive Caucus, said this week.
They’ve known since Alito’s draft was leaked how the SC was going to rule. Thread: "Biden wants to “codify Roe v Wade into law.” What can Biden do now that he couldn’t have done in the time since the leak? Idle threats, IMO.
The President has no power over the Senate, you know that right?
WW
Manchin and Sinema refuse to change the rules around the filibuster. But if the Dems gain two senate seats this November it is perhaps feasible.
The dems would have to win senate races in Georgia, Pennsylvania, Nevada, Arizona and Wisconsin.
He could have used it’s failure as a campaign issue then…
You should tell him.
I think he knows.
He can call for something all he wants. Whether the Senate chooses do it or not is not up to him, it’s up to the Senate.
WW
I think it would fall into the same gray area of a lot of federal laws that are constitutional or unconstitutional depending on your interpretation of the general welfare clause. Or maybe they could claim its interstate commerce since abortion bans will lead to people going across state lines to get an abortion?
Right to privacy has nothing to do with killing unborn babies imo.
1 Like
I see no reason the SC wouldn’t overturn his attempt to bypass them.
And that is precisely libs been wanting to do…and they’re hoping abortion issue is the ticket to end filibuster.
And who started it Marge?
In my book, if that’s going to happen, it needs to be a Constitutional amendment.
1 Like
Why?
They simply dismantled Roe saying there was nothing in the Constitution about it. They didnt say that states laws to protect abortion rights were unconstitutional. Why federal laws?
I personally don’t see that as an acceptable solution to anything.
1 Like
During Obama’s reign.
I think you’ll find legislatures toying with Texas style bounty hunter civil suit laws (to skirt the interstate commerce clause) as a way to intimidate out of state abortion doctors from providing services to red state women.
