General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsCan the disabled filibuster?
The Texas filibuster rules seem to have been written by the international Olympic committee, so plain are they that what is being described is a primarily athletic undertaking. You must stand. You cannot be in contact with any item or structure that might support you... your thighs cannot press on the edge of a desk. I don't think you can gasp a podium. You must speak continually and about the bill in question.
The first thing that came to mind was, is a disabled legislator simply unable to hold the floor? Can anyone just interrupt someone in a wheelchair because he or she is not standing?
I don't recall whether Max Cleland ever tried a filibuster when he was in the senate. Would foul have been called? I realize that some elderly men have pulled off impressive filibusters historically, but their relative prowess in standing shouldn't even be a factor.
Archaic rule is archaic.
I love it when it does something good, like last night in TX, but in general it is a truly ridiculous concept. The fact that both US Senate cloakrooms are equiped with catheters (they are) should have gone out with wooden teeth.
I know of no reason that an athlete should enjoy any procedural advantage versus any other legislator. It's like, "The chair shall first recognize the tallest member present," or, "whoosoever shall pull this sword from the stone shall be President Pro Tempore."
ZombieHorde
(29,047 posts)but I don't know for sure. Good question.
cthulu2016
(10,960 posts)If it is plain that someone should not have a rules advantage over someone confined to a wheelchair, what about someone who just has poor circulation, fallen arches or had knee surgery a few years back, if you see what I mean.
I have no recognized disability, but I couldn't stand for 13 hours. And so on.
ZombieHorde
(29,047 posts)PoliticAverse
(26,366 posts)cthulu2016
(10,960 posts)So it is really, "Whoever just doesn't give a flying F' about anything rules."
KamaAina
(78,249 posts)the repukes had the temerity to issue her a warning when she had another senator help her adjust it!
I don't think the U.S. Senate rules, even for a real filibuster rather than the watered-down variety Harry Reid left us stuck with , are nearly as harsh. But it's not just Cleland. Imagine Susan Collins with her sporadic dysphoria speaking for 13 hours straight!
longship
(40,416 posts)Indeed, Max Cleland or Tammy Duckworth.
Although I would like to think that both of them could make a go at it.
The rules do seemed rigged to stop filibusters altogether. So why even have the darn things if you are going to do that?
But I suppose it might be long tradition in TX Senate just as it is in the US Senate.
What would be interesting is to know the history of these rules. How and when were they adopted?
That might reveal a lot.
on edit: DUrec
bluedigger
(17,088 posts)It seems like the Texas Senate is not in compliance with the ADA (Americans with Disabilities Act).