Gerrymanderer Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Now I know you Republicans have a really really
> tough time with facts. And I know usually you
> Republicans like to cover your abhorrent
> unprecedented actions with irrelevant
> disinformation. But I believe this is the chart
> you should refer to when determining the historic
> nature of the Senate filibuster and comparing it
> to how it used today by the Republican party.
Your graph, like most of the rest of your crap, is bogus.
Here are better breakdowns with actual back-up from the Brennan Center, which certainly is not a conservative source.
http://www.brennancenter.org/publication/curbing-filibuster-abuse#graphs
The low percentage of passage has been on a continuing decline for many years. You can clearly see the effect of Reid's use of the filibuster during Bush's first term. This newly claimed "obstructionist" BS on the part of Republicans amounts to only a few percent difference and is roughly in line with the overall trend since the rules were changed. The fact is that, given the new rules, both parties have increasingly taken advantage of what is for the minority a more effective way to exert its influence, and, overall, the Senate has been an increasingly less productive place generally prior to blaming the current minority.
The largest jump came during the 110th Congress prior to Obama's term, mostly due to Reid's actions.
You can see the same as used to block Bush's judicial appointments.
A further primary reason for the increased number of filibusters during Reid's leadership is him not permitting minority amendments to any bills, which is the primary case where it has been employed.
If you want somebody to blame for increased use of the filibuster, then you don't have to look any further than Reid himself.
And, once again, your uninformed blind partisan talking point BS gets shot down by facts.