Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

51 votes, 60 votes and Filibustering

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
Pryderi Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-21-09 03:05 PM
Original message
51 votes, 60 votes and Filibustering
How long can the Republicans filibuster a bill? Is there a time limit on a filibuster? Does the GOP have to find a Mr. Smith?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
berni_mccoy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-21-09 03:06 PM
Response to Original message
1. Any senator can do it and they can do it indefinitely.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pryderi Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-21-09 03:07 PM
Response to Reply #1
3. They don't have to stand up and talk like Jimmy Stewart in "Mr. Smith Goes to Washington"?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
berni_mccoy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-21-09 03:14 PM
Response to Reply #3
5. They can do anything they want... most likely they would share the burden
Often times they read books out loud in doing it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AlinPA Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-21-09 03:17 PM
Response to Reply #5
6. I assume no other business can be conducted in senate while it is going on.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
elocs Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-21-09 03:41 PM
Response to Reply #3
11. Many still believe it is like that quaint film. It's not. I do like the movie, though. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EOTE Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-21-09 04:10 PM
Response to Reply #3
15. Can you explain what the process is then?
I've heard that they no longer need to actually fill up the time they want to filibuster with, but I don't understand how it's currently done. It also angers the hell out of me that this is now a standard political tactic of the right. I think if they did have to do something like that, it would deter them. And why is it that the mere threat of a filibuster is enough nowadays? I'm really in the dark. Care to shed some light?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ThomWV Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-21-09 05:15 PM
Response to Reply #15
18. Its a little bit complicated to explain other than to say they have to keep talking
You have to go to Rule XXII of the Senate Rules but what it comes down to is someone files a motion to close discussions, but then within 2 hours another Senator can schedule to speak and along with those he would yield time to (other Republicans) he can keep talking in (I believe its 5-minute) segments as long as he and those with him can keep talking - they can't quit and they have to stay on subject, or wherever the subject leads them.

At any rate at some point one side runs out of speakers who can stand and move their jaws or the other side backs down on the subject and alows the motion to be tabled.

The thing is we haven't made them actually Fillibuster, they just threaten it and we back down. Make them stand up to the mike, 24/7 for a week or so and see how foolish they look.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EOTE Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-21-09 05:29 PM
Response to Reply #18
19. Dear god, why then?
It sickens me that the mere mention of the word filibuster is enough to make dems back down. I'm dying to see one of these filibusters and I'm sick to death of it being used as a weapon. Something seems to me to be very fishy when the mere threat is just as effective as actually going through with it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rhett o rick Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-21-09 05:40 PM
Response to Reply #19
22. I believe last year the republicans threaten to filibuster close to 100 times
and never had to actually filibuster. The mere threat made the Democrats give in. someone please correct me if i am wrong here.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TahitiNut Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-21-09 03:29 PM
Response to Reply #1
10. "I suggest the absence of a quorum."
That's why they bring in the cots.

:shrug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Captain Hilts Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-21-09 03:06 PM
Response to Original message
2. The longer the better. MAKE THEM DO IT. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
wryter2000 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-21-09 03:11 PM
Response to Original message
4. They'd do it as a group
One Repig would talk for a while, and then, another would take his place. I don't believe there's any time limit, although I could be wrong about that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cdsilv Donating Member (883 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-21-09 03:20 PM
Response to Reply #4
7. Supposedly no time limit - but they should be forced to do it ....
and I hope (without hope) that the media would report that the GOP is doing it to block
HC reform....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pryderi Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-21-09 03:25 PM
Response to Reply #7
8. Wouldn't the danger be they would "frame" themselves as "Mr. Smith goes to Washington" and "standing
for their principles'?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
valerief Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-21-09 04:02 PM
Response to Reply #8
13. People want healthcare, not Capraism. If they framed themselves
that way, anyway, only one of them would have to talk non-stop. They'd never do that. Hell, Reid won't even make them talk.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
wryter2000 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-21-09 05:07 PM
Response to Reply #8
17. What I'd like to see
Is Dems taking their turns and read account after account of people who've died or gone into bankruptcy because of insurance companies.

That would make great theatre -- exhausted Senator, emotional and fighing tears, telling about John Smith in his district who was denied a kidney transplant and died, leaving his wife and kids with no health insurance because they got it through his job.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Botany Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-21-09 03:28 PM
Response to Original message
9. We can win this with 51 votes and a public option ...... 77% of the people ...
.... want health care reform and w/ a public option too. Let the republicans filibuster because sooner or
later we are going to have to fight this fight w/ the republicans. We had an election and "they" lost and we
won w/ a mandate for change. Elections have consequences.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
elocs Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-21-09 03:53 PM
Response to Original message
12. About the filibuster from here:
http://www.juntosociety.com/government/filibuster.htm


What is the filibuster?

It might be easiest to start with where the word filibuster came from. In the book Politics and Principle, Sarah Binder and Steven Smith set forth the history of the word in a section they call “From Freebooters to Filibusters .” The word filibuster only actually came into play in the senate in the late nineteenth century. According to Binder and Smith, the origin of the word appears to be a cross between the English and Dutch for free booty, a term to describe looters who lived on others’ booty and spoils. The Dutch was translated into English as flibutor, and then became freebooter. The word slowly became filibuster and was used in the Senate to describe Senators who had developed techniques for holding up legislation that they were opposed to.

The ability to filibuster has its roots in the founding period and in the Standing Rules of the Senate. It is important to note that filibusters are not the normal occurrence, and in fact they are rarely employed. Filibusters can only be used when a Unanimous Consent Agreement is not in place, meaning that all Senators have not agreed to limit debate. If all the Senators do agree to limit debate through the Unanimous Consent Agreement, which most often is the case, the filibuster is no longer an option. The ability to filibuster is drawn from the rule of unlimited debate. The senate is permitted to debate on a bill unlimitedly, unless before debate, all Senators agree to limit their ability to debate that issue. Thus, on non-controversial matters, Senators will usually waive their right to unlimited debate.

“Generally characterized in the public mind as a non-stop speech, a filibuster in the fullest sense employs every parliamentary maneuver and dilatory motion to delay, modify, or defeat legislation. ” So, the filibuster is not just one senator rambling on and on to hold up the floor of the Senate, as is characterized by Jimmy Stewart, in “Mr. Smith goes to Washington.” Although, this can be an integral part of it. The filibuster also employs a full arsenal of motions and objections. For example, one senator could add an unlimited amount of amendments to the bill, despite germaneness , and debate them all. In addition he can continually ask that a quorum call be in effect, keeping senators there at all hours. The key to the filibuster is to continually hold the floor and refuse to yield it to anyone but your supporters. If you are the only one filibustering, than you must keep the floor by yourself. One Senator said about invoking a filibuster, “if it takes unanimous consent, object. If not, you make a little speech, suggest and absence of quorum, then…use parliamentary procedures…motions to adjourn, motions to recess… ”

The filibuster is the last resort when it comes to stopping legislation. Most Senators do not want to start a filibuster because it virtually stops all floor action on any legislation, tying the floor up on one bill. Although on the floor it is the last resort, sometimes threatening a filibuster can be a powerful bargaining chip. By threatening to filibuster, Senators are able to give their input on a bill, possibly changing it, or preventing it from even being scheduled. Senator Byrd once said, “In many instances, it’s the threat of the filibuster that keeps a bill from coming up. ”
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProgrezivIndie Donating Member (165 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-21-09 04:02 PM
Response to Original message
14. ...actually "Cloture" can end any "republiCON Filibuster" rather easily:
Edited on Fri Aug-21-09 04:04 PM by ProgrezivIndie
That is to say, if "wikipedia.org" has current & correct information... and I have no reason to doubt the following:

source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cloture

<...snip...>

The procedure for "invoking cloture," or ending a filibuster, is as follows:

* A minimum of sixteen senators must sign a petition for cloture.
* The petition may be presented by interrupting another Senator's speech.
* The clerk reads the petition.
* The cloture petition is ignored for one full day during which the Senate is sitting (If the petition is filed on a Friday, it is ignored until Monday, assuming that the Senate did not sit on Saturday or Sunday.)
* On the second calendar day during which the Senate sits after the presentation of the petition, after the Senate has been sitting for one hour, a "quorum call" is undertaken to ensure that a majority of the Senators are present.
* The President of the Senate or President pro tempore presents the petition.
* The Senate votes on the petition; three-fifths of the whole number of Senators (sixty with no vacancies) is the required majority; however, when cloture is invoked on a question of changing the rules of the Senate, two-thirds of the Senators voting (not necessarily two-thirds of all Senators) is the requisite majority.

After cloture has been invoked, the following restrictions apply:

* No more than thirty hours of debate may occur.<8>
* No Senator may speak for more than one hour.
* No amendments may be moved unless they were filed on the day in between the presentation of the petition and the actual cloture vote.
* All amendments must be relevant to the debate.
* Certain debates on procedure are not permissible.
* The presiding officer gains additional power in controlling debate.
* No other matters may be considered until the question upon which cloture was invoked is disposed of.

The ability to invoke cloture was last attained by a US political party in the 111th Congress, by the Democrats, with the help of two independents..<9>

<...snip...>
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pryderi Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-21-09 04:33 PM
Response to Reply #14
16. So it takes 60 votes to end a filibuster. That means the GOP can filibuster forever?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RagAss Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-21-09 05:34 PM
Response to Reply #16
20. Yes and we should let them...until the end of time.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rhett o rick Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-21-09 05:37 PM
Response to Original message
21. According the Sen Reid, they only have to threaten and he caves. nm
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Gold Metal Flake Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-21-09 05:42 PM
Response to Reply #21
23. Correct answer.
The normal rules do not apply when your Senate Majority Leader is a coward.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri Apr 26th 2024, 11:55 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC