Alas the Filibuster

A group of Democratic Senators are pushing to eliminate the filibuster for procedural votes.

http://www.capitolhillblue.com/node/35424

Obviously this is a call to action for AH.com. What are the likely PODs for alternate changes to the filibuster rule or even getting rid of it (pre-1900 is OK)? More importantly, what are the effects of those PODs?

Here are some past threads, if you're interested in wading through them:

https://www.alternatehistory.com/discussion/search.php?searchid=4866927

I suspect that paradoxically one result of this change is going to be more likelihood of divided government. As recent events show, a one-party government will enact more radical legislation that irritates the population, so the House will switch hands and, voila, divided government.

We have been taught by the Clinton years that divided government means fiscal responsibility, but I think a more likely outcome is even more fiscal irresponsibility. Today's Democrats want spending more than they want increased taxes, and today's Republicans want decreased taxes more than they want decreased spending, so they compromise by lowering taxes and increasing spending, or at least by refusing to raise taxes and refusing to cut spending. Alt parties might have different priorities (maybe both want spending, just on different things), but again the likely compromise is to spend on both priorities.

Comprehensive or sweeping legislation will be easier to enact but also easier to repeal. Because of this, in times when the consensus is really changing, like as in the New Deal era, you may be more likely to get constitutional amendments instead of just a raft of new legislation.
 
Top