Skip to main content

View Diary: Senate Rs mad that Senate Ds might pass filibuster reform they agree with (98 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  I think you're confused or at a minimum ... (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    pelagicray

    you're confusing me about what you're referring to.

    The rule used to be two-thirds of those present and voting to impose cloture. That came to 67 in a full Senate but it was pro-rated for members absent. When the change came it was to 60 as you say, but that was irrespective of the number of members present.

    It is this requirement that imposes a burden on the majority. And Ornstein's proposal reverse that by requiring 40 votes to sustain a filibuster irrespective of how many members are voting. It requires the minority to be in constant attendance and their filibuster can be broken with a small number of opposing senators present.

    But if you're referring to the talking filibuster, I agree with those who say it doesn't really accomplish anything

    "The smartest man in the room is not always right." -Richard Holbrooke

    by Demi Moaned on Mon Nov 26, 2012 at 04:02:53 PM PST

    [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site