Skip to main content

View Diary: Apologies to DailyKos and to Senator Reid (282 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Right. And this is why (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    carolita

    the following claims in this diary are confusing me:

    if there are enough minority votes to deny cloture, an old-school filibuster is unnecessary.  Cloture (an end to debate) MUST take place before voting on a bill can begin.  No ifs, ands or buts about it.

    Note what it did NOT say could be filibustered, however: the actual bill on the floor itself.

    no Republicans even need show up to debate or speechify.

    Unless I'm failing to grasp something (not at all impossible), both the Senate's website and the ThisNation article to which this diary links do not support these claims.  It would appear that a Senator must be willing to physically debate a bill for a filibuster to occur.  And it would also appear that cloture is something that is used in response to filibusters, and is not a procedural requirement for every bill that comes up.  Furthermore, it appears that a bill, and not just amendments and procedural motions, may be filibustered.

    The only maxim of a free government ought to be to trust no man living with power to endanger the public liberty. - John Adams

    by tipsymcstagger on Thu Jan 25, 2007 at 04:39:23 PM PST

    [ Parent ]

    •  All your points are correct (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      tipsymcstagger

      The current rule as I read it is that it takes 60 votes to force a vote on the underlying bill.

      We didn't use that, due to many lobbyists leaning one us.

      We need to lean harder.

      "Our lives begin to end the day we become silent about the things that matter." Dr. ML King, from a jail cell in Birmingham, Alabama in 1963.

      by bewert on Thu Jan 25, 2007 at 05:28:59 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  (pulling my hair out!) (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        carolita

        I just went back and read the diary to which this refers as well as the long BTD exchanges in the comments thread.  There is nothing there to support the claims in this diary in terms of external information.  In fact, most (though not all) of BTD's points relate to the political rather than factual question of whether it would be germane for the Dems to lean on the Reps in this fashion.  BTD's argument seems to be that there is a normative expectation that the majority will not force a filibuster unless it has the votes for cloture and that, therefore, doing so would be perceived as obstruction.  

        I reserve any strong conclusions until the diarist responds, but it seems to me that we were closer to the truth the first time around.

        The only maxim of a free government ought to be to trust no man living with power to endanger the public liberty. - John Adams

        by tipsymcstagger on Thu Jan 25, 2007 at 05:51:24 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Incidentally (0+ / 0-)

          The rules changes that prevent a senator from pulling a Thurmond-esque phone-book-style filibuster seem to be just that - the new rules merely require that the debate be germane to the matter at hand.  Nothing to do with whether or not the senator needs to be holding the floor.  

          The only maxim of a free government ought to be to trust no man living with power to endanger the public liberty. - John Adams

          by tipsymcstagger on Thu Jan 25, 2007 at 06:03:14 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

        •  Look (0+ / 0-)

          You do not understand it. It has been explained to you.

          I don't know what else to tell you.

    •  Yes they do (0+ / 0-)

      You are not understanding.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site