Skip to main content

View Diary: Filibuster reform: you still need it every day (159 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  P.S. (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Eric Nelson

    I guess even that has it drawbacks - Thugs would put out a lot of junk motions just for the purpose of taking up time that would have to go to the floor. So, under this Rule there would be no limit?

    Or is there a way limit it - some motions could be declared non-debatable and others not. How would you handle that?

    There will come a day of judgment, and our Republican friends know that. That, Mr. President, is why they are terrified. - Sheldon Whitehouse

    by RhodaA on Sat Jul 03, 2010 at 10:09:18 AM PDT

    [ Parent ]

    •  You could just make the one kind non-debatable. (4+ / 0-)

      Specifically, motions to proceed to consideration of a bill or resolution.

      •  PPS (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        SoCalSal, Eric Nelson

        I guess I didn't ask my questions clearly; I'll try another day. Thanks for your replies. Much appreciated.

        Just so I remember what to find out:

        1. There is no rule Dems have in the current Congress that allows a motion to proceed to be non-debable? (Would have to wait for next congress?)
        1. If there were a rule that allows a motion to proceed to be non-debatable, it would apply to the Thugs equally, I suppose. Therefore, would there then be a way to limit bringing junk motions to proceed to the floor for debate, which could be endless and jam the senate even worse?

        There will come a day of judgment, and our Republican friends know that. That, Mr. President, is why they are terrified. - Sheldon Whitehouse

        by RhodaA on Sat Jul 03, 2010 at 10:41:07 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site