- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: When you control House, Senate, and Presidency… why do omnibus bills?
Posted on 7/2/25 at 10:16 pm to M. A. Ryland
Posted on 7/2/25 at 10:16 pm to M. A. Ryland
quote:seems like a good reason to get rid of the filibuster. Republican politicians want it this way for some reason.
All those single-issue bills would be filibustered in the Senate, and would never get a vote. This is the silliest talking point right no
1
Posted on 7/2/25 at 10:16 pm to The Baker
quote:
Does changing a senate rule require 60 votes as well?
Nope. 51 votes.
Posted on 7/2/25 at 10:19 pm to crewdepoo
quote:
seems like a good reason to get rid of the filibuster. Republican politicians want it this way for some reason
Is there some sort of gentleman’s agreement with the filibuster?
They don’t get rid of it because they are worried about repercussions when the House and senate flip? But whats to stop dems from doing it anyway when they get the senate back? The calculus seems off
Posted on 7/2/25 at 10:23 pm to The Baker
It’s a Senate tradition, nothing more.
Posted on 7/2/25 at 10:24 pm to RIPMachoMan
That's the uniparty and both parties are full of them. You have to be realistic and take small bites out when possible.
Posted on 7/2/25 at 10:27 pm to The Baker
quote:
why do omnibus bills?
Because 51 votes aint enough in the Senate
quote:
Once a bill gets to a vote on the Senate floor, it requires a simple majority of 51 votes to pass after debate has ended. But there’s a catch: before it can get to a vote, it actually takes 60 votes to cut off debate, which is why a 60-vote supermajority is now considered the de facto minimum for passing legislation in the Senate.
Posted on 7/2/25 at 10:27 pm to Chancellor
quote:gotcha.
It’s a Senate tradition, nothing more.
Well senate approval ratings are like in the single digits, so maybe the nuclear option would do some good.
Posted on 7/2/25 at 10:28 pm to The Baker
quote:
60 votes for single bills and 51 votes for omnibus bills? Is this a constitutional thing or just a senate rule thing?
Reconciliation Bills are considered privileged legislation. Privileged legislation bills can’t be filibustered therefore they only need a simple majority to pass. I think this goes back to the Budget Act of 76 maybe? I can’t remember exactly.
Posted on 7/2/25 at 10:29 pm to The Baker
quote:
Is there some sort of gentleman’s agreement with the filibuster?
The Dems are still kicking themselves in the arse for eliminating the filibuster on judicial nominations under Obama. The GOP warned them they would regret it.
Fast forward to the Trump admin who appointed 3 SCOTUS judges with a simple majority. No way any of them gets 60 votes.
As bad as things are, the filibuster is the last guardrail in place.
Posted on 7/2/25 at 10:41 pm to Lynxrufus2012
quote:
Plus it would take foreve
Not my problem. Those representatives and senators volunteered for the job. Nobody told them to run for office.
If they can't handle the hours, then they need to GTFO and let someone else do it. They already get paid way too much and work very little hours. Plus most of them make so much off of insider trading.
Don't feel bad for any senator or representative whining about their vacations getting cut short or having to travel in pajamas.
Posted on 7/2/25 at 10:45 pm to Chancellor
quote:
The filibuster is a Senate rule- not a Constitutional one- and it can be eliminated at any time.
Wonderful tool to hand the Marxists when they're back in the majority.
Posted on 7/2/25 at 10:48 pm to Adajax
quote:
Wonderful tool to hand the Marxists when they're back in the majority.
The alternative is to keep passing omnibus bills like this one until we are insolvent and the economy collapses and the money saved in a tax cut isn’t worth the paper on which it’s printed.
Might as well take the chance and then get serious about stopping election stealing.
Posted on 7/2/25 at 10:57 pm to The Baker
Because Republicans don't have a majority. They lie.
Posted on 7/2/25 at 11:09 pm to M. A. Ryland
You jam a single bill massive tax cut in front of the Senate and you make those swing state Democrats go on the record with a "No" vote. Only gutless Republicans could not understand that.
Posted on 7/2/25 at 11:11 pm to The Baker
quote:it's possible. Dems we're apparently one vote short of it (ending fillibuster) llast term.
Is there some sort of gentleman’s agreement with the filibuster?
Posted on 7/2/25 at 11:16 pm to SoFla Tideroller
quote:
You jam a single bill massive tax cut
You guys haven't been listening to massie and the freedom caucus. These tax cuts cost $4.5 trillion over 10 years. They want spending cuts to pay for it.
Posted on 7/2/25 at 11:17 pm to SoFla Tideroller
quote:
You jam a single bill massive tax cut in front of the Senate and you make those swing state Democrats go on the record with a "No" vote. Only gutless Republicans could not understand that.
Right. This action seems very obvious to me.
Posted on 7/2/25 at 11:20 pm to JustSmokin
Deal
Posted on 7/2/25 at 11:29 pm to Taxing Authority
This would have been the way to do it.
The traditional budget was like 12 separate bills.
Instead of one giant BBB Trump could have pushed a 10 or 12 bill package that would have seen 8 or 9 bill pass easily and then fight over 3 or 4.
The traditional budget was like 12 separate bills.
Instead of one giant BBB Trump could have pushed a 10 or 12 bill package that would have seen 8 or 9 bill pass easily and then fight over 3 or 4.
Page 2 of 3
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News