Dammit. If the republicans want to keep fillibustering, how about actually making them do so?

If they continue to insist on using this tool against every single proposal in the senate, why does our leadership stil abide by the unofficial agreement to not force the person to stand up and actually fillibuster?

You can't tell me that the republicans would back off this horeshit if they realized that TV was going to start reporting on how they're shutting down government for days to prevent a vote on help for small business owners.

I hate the fact that democrats insist on playing by unwritten rules while the republicans not only abandon them but have the tenacity to blame the democrats for the breakdown in government.

Expose them and put them on notice. You want to require 60 votes to move forward? Be prepared to read "War & Peace" while the public watches.

Assholes.

elite in DC do not listen.

It is more important for them to maintain their friendships with the enemy than actually accomplish something of value and significance.

So no, they will NEVER make the pukes actually filibuster, no matter how much or how loud we type.

Besides, they are afraid of the GOP and the media and would never do anything that might cost them image points.

a few months ago, Maddow reporting on how Reid's "bring out the cots" position was putting some real brakes on filibustering. So ... why did they stop doing that? Yeah ... make 'em stand and make 'em talk.

Trav

Senate rules determine what a filibuster is.

Nobody is actually filibustering anything now, they are merely threatening to. Do the new rules say that "intent" is all that's needed? When did that happen?

dupe

but cannot find the rules on the Senate website. They explain filibusters, they define cloture, but I can find no place where they talk about a silent filibuster in the Senate rules, or on Senator's websites where they attempt to explain filibusters. Maybe this is just a "gentleman's agreement" and is not written anywhere? Whatever it is, a change is necessary. I want to see a Senator read the phone book to us.

From the U.S. Senate Site
http://www.senate.gov/reference/reference_index_subjects/Cloture_vrd.htm

Who are the 41 Senators right now who have stated that they intend to filibuster? From your reference:

"In 1975, the Senate reduced the number of votes needed to invoke cloture to three-fifths (60) of Senate membership. At the same time, they made the filibuster "invisible" by requiring only that 41 Senators state that they intend to filibuster."

I heard that there are only 10 Senators who say they are willing to filibuster.

And I guess I am getting old, but has there really not been a true filibuster since before 1975?

So, they decide they want to do something. One person says filibuster, and to bring it to the floor they hold a vote. Unless Democrats get 60 votes, it doesn't go to the floor. Legislation that technically only needs a majority to pass must be crafted to appeal to the three most moderate Republicans and the 10 most conservative Democrats. If it doesn't fit, there is no cloture and it doesn't get to the floor.

There has been not true filibuster since 1975, because the rules don't require it. They must have a cloture vote with 60 votes to even begin discussing anything. And they need 66 votes to change Senate rules unless someone uses the nuclear option and uses the Supreme Court to toss out rule 22. If that is done, everything would pass in the Senate by a simple majority, excepting those votes defined in the Constitution to require more.

changed to make a filibuster occur when someone says the word. Guess I fell asleep somewhere and the rules changed on me, but I remember filibusters---gawd, talk about boring. I will have to research this---anyone with info on why filibusters are threatened but can't happen is free to help me with this research.