Thread: Power grab attempt by Reid?

Reid Will Open January Senate Session With a Power Grab Attempt
By Jerry McConnell Sunday, January 2, 2011
If American citizens needed more proof that Harry Reid, the scumbag Senator of the once-proud state of Nevada, but which now should hang its collective head for voting Reid back into the United States Senate, his latest nasty venture for unbridled power should provide that validation.



Not satisfied that he got the Lame Duck Congress to pass more “gawd-awfulâ€

"Reid does have the backing of Senator Chuck Schumer (D-NY) and Senator Tom Udall (D-NM) and Lugar, Hatch, Snowe, and Brown".
WHO You mean the shad in a Striper Boil?

YOU ARE SO RIGHT ABOUT THE CITIZENS OF NAVADA SHOULD HANG THEIR HEADS IN SHAME FOR REELECTING THIS MAN FOR ANOTHER TERM IN THE SENATE. HE DOSEN'T DESERVE TO BE ELECTED AS A DOG CATCHER IMO AND, ITS MY GUESS THA A LOT OF LEGAL LATINO'S HELPED THOSE WHO ARE ILLEGAL VOTE HIM IN. AND IF THEY DID, THEY ARE SOME DUMB @ZZ PEOPLE THEY PLAYED BY THE RULES AND YET MANY OF THEM ARE ON THE SIDE OF LAW BREAKERS HOW DUMB CAN THESE PEOPLE BE

Reid's Rules Scheme To Rewrite Defeat
by Emily Miller
12/29/2010

The Democrats are trying to change the Senate rules so that they can ram through their agenda when their majority shrinks next week from 59 to 53 seats.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) has been scheming behind closed doors to use his slim majority to vote on January 5 for the most drastic rules changes since 1975.

"Democrats lost the election. Their power has been weakened significantly. So they are trying to do a Washington-insider tactic to try to grab power, even though the voters told them very clearly in the election that they didn't like them, and didn't like their policies," said a Republican Senate aide.

In a closed-door meeting last week, Reid told the Democrats that he may outright break the rules on the first day of the 112th Congress in order to pass his audacious changes without bipartisan support.

"If Reid endorses the rules change, it would be the first time in history that a Majority Leader has opted to cut off debate on a Senate rules change by a majority vote," said Marty Gold, a long-time Senate leadership aide and now an attorney at Covington and Burling.

Currently, the Senate needs 67 votes to end debate on a rule, then 51 votes for the rule itself. Since Reid's rules do not have Republican support, he will need to do a historic end-run around the 67-vote bar (two-thirds of the Senate) to pass them.

Reid’s plan is backed by Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y), the ambitious operator who is Chairman of the Rules Committee. Schumer held six hearings in 2010 alone on the filibuster and Senate rules changes.

Backed by Schumer and Reid, Sen. Tom Udall (D-N.M.) drafted three major rules changes, which he will bring up for a vote on January 5.

First, the Democrats would make the unprecedented move to change the Senate rules each time a new Congress is elected. Throughout its history, the Senate rules have carried over in a new Congress.

The Senate is a "continuing body" because its members are elected every six years, on a staggered basis. So for each new Congress, two-thirds of the Senators are continuing their terms, thus the rules stayed intact.

"The Senate has always changed its rules by regular order," said Gold, referring to getting the 67-vote threshold. "So for Udall to do this now would be take that history and turn it on its head. This would be an extraordinary step that makes the Senate like the House of Representatives, with respect to how it treats its own rules."

In the House, all the Members are up for election every two years, so each new Congress elects new rules at the beginning of the term. Incoming House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) proposed popular new rules for the 112th Congress, which will be voted on after he is sworn in on January 5.

Second, the Senate Democrats are trying to change the filibuster process so that bills can get voted on with only 51 votes, rather than 60 votes (three-fifths of the Senate). A filibuster on a bill involves debate without a time limit. The filibuster is a stalling tactic used by the minority so it can affect debate and votes.

Under the current rule adopted in 1975, the Senate can end a filibuster by getting 60 votes for cloture, which would end the debate. After the 60-vote cloture hurdle, the legislation goes to the floor for a vote. Udall wants to change the process so only 51 votes are needed to vote on legislation, which would take away the power of the minority party to prevent passage of a bill.

“Dems thought 60 was too big a lift when they had 59 votes,â€

Originally Posted by LadyStClaire

YOU ARE SO RIGHT ABOUT THE CITIZENS OF NAVADA SHOULD HANG THEIR HEADS IN SHAME FOR REELECTING THIS MAN FOR ANOTHER TERM IN THE SENATE. HE DOSEN'T DESERVE TO BE ELECTED AS A DOG CATCHER IMO AND, ITS MY GUESS THA A LOT OF LEGAL LATINO'S HELPED THOSE WHO ARE ILLEGAL VOTE HIM IN. AND IF THEY DID, THEY ARE SOME DUMB @ZZ PEOPLE THEY PLAYED BY THE RULES AND YET MANY OF THEM ARE ON THE SIDE OF LAW BREAKERS HOW DUMB CAN THESE PEOPLE BE

I'm a citizen of Nevada and I didn't vote for this moron

Illegals and union members voted this idiot back in , Also the strong arm mafia thug tactics in the casinos

I still say he broke about a hundred election laws but there is no way to prove it.

Join the conversation Nevada Secretary Of State Says No Evidence Of Vote Fraud
By Sean Whaley | 11:06 am October 27th, 2010
RENO – Secretary of State Ross Miller said today there have been no complaints filed with his office about suspicious voter activity despite email rumors and media accounts that at least some electronic voting machines are pre-programmed to support U.S. Senate candidate Harry Reid, D-NV.

Miller, holding the first of two media briefings on the allegations, urged anyone seeing a violation of election or voting law to file a formal complaint with his office so it can be investigated.

“I know that tensions are running high this election and that emotions are running very strong, but I want to set the record straight,â€

Originally Posted by Justthefacts

Originally Posted by LadyStClaire

YOU ARE SO RIGHT ABOUT THE CITIZENS OF NAVADA SHOULD HANG THEIR HEADS IN SHAME FOR REELECTING THIS MAN FOR ANOTHER TERM IN THE SENATE. HE DOSEN'T DESERVE TO BE ELECTED AS A DOG CATCHER IMO AND, ITS MY GUESS THA A LOT OF LEGAL LATINO'S HELPED THOSE WHO ARE ILLEGAL VOTE HIM IN. AND IF THEY DID, THEY ARE SOME DUMB @ZZ PEOPLE THEY PLAYED BY THE RULES AND YET MANY OF THEM ARE ON THE SIDE OF LAW BREAKERS HOW DUMB CAN THESE PEOPLE BE

I'm a citizen of Nevada and I didn't vote for this moron

Illegals and union members voted this idiot back in , Also the strong arm mafia thug tactics in the casinos

I still say he broke about a hundred election laws but there is no way to prove it.

Look no further than the S.E.I.U Their membership In Clark County Is at least 50% Illegals. Where Is I.C.E ? TS