Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

One Senator's modest proposal: Force Senators to actually filibuster

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » General Discussion: Presidency Donate to DU
 
babylonsister Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-01-10 01:06 PM
Original message
One Senator's modest proposal: Force Senators to actually filibuster
http://voices.washingtonpost.com/plum-line/2010/12/one_senators_modest_proposal_f.html

One Senator's modest proposal: Force Senators to actually filibuster
By Greg Sargent


The problem for those who want to do away with the filibuster and restore some functionality to the Senate is that some argue it requires a two thirds vote to make it happen -- a virtual impossibility given today's Senate math. (Update: See below.)

But Senator Jeff Merkley, one of a younger crop of reform-minded Democrats, has thought of a way around this problem: Start with a smaller reform that could make filibustering much more politically difficult than it is right now. Merkley is working behind the scenes to build support for a rules change that would force Senators to actually filibuster on the floor.

Merkley is distributing a memo making this case to colleages
, which was sent my way, and I'm told Merkley will bring the idea up at a Senate caucus meeting today. Merkley notes that it's a myth that there's currently a way to force Senators to filibuster on the floor, and proposes:

The public believes that filibustering senators have to hold the floor. Indeed, the public perceives the filibuster as an act of principled public courage and sacrifice. Let's make it so.

Require a specific number of Senators -- I suggest five for the first 24 hours, 10 for the second 24 hours, and 20 thereafter -- to be on the floor to sustain the filibuster. This would be required even during quorum calls. At any point, a member could call for a count of the senators on the floor who stand in opposition to the regular order, and if the count falls below the required level, the regular order prevails and a majority vote is held.


Under Merkley's proposed change, if a party or group of Senators oppose bringing a bill to the floor for debate -- or opposes ending debate -- they will have to sustain continued opposition on the floor of the Senate. If they don't, the filibuster collapses. The idea is to force the filibuster out into the light of day, where the public can see what's happening.

Merkley's office believes such a change to the rules could be accomplished with a simple majority vote in the Senate, and Merkley will be pushing colleagues to join his effort to make such a vote happen at the outset of the new session in January. Read his full memo here.

UPDATE, 12:55 p.m.: The question of whether two thirds are needed to do away with the filibuster is actually up for debate. Senator Tom Udall, for instance, has argued that each Congress has the right to change its rules under a simple majority vote, and he has vowed to try to force such a motion on the first day of the new Congress, doing away with the 60-vote threshold for procedural motions.

Merkley's contribution to this debate is suggesting a somewhat more modest rules change -- forcing Senators to actually filibuster on the floor -- that might gain more support in the Senate than a wholesale nixing of the filibuster might.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
stray cat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-01-10 01:20 PM
Response to Original message
1. Fllibuster tax cuts - they should be made to do it
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
badtoworse Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-01-10 01:41 PM
Response to Reply #1
3. That is a two-edged sword
Given the number of seats we will have to defend in 2012, there is a significant chance we will lose the Senate. The onus of actually fillibustering would then be on us.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
thanks_imjustlurking Donating Member (462 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-01-10 09:30 PM
Response to Reply #3
5. Fine. I'm sick and tired of maneuvering for partisan advantage, on either side. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Recursion Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-01-10 01:39 PM
Response to Original message
2. The filibuster is broken
I'm glad to see talk about reforming it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bluenorthwest Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-01-10 02:02 PM
Response to Original message
4. Jeff is wasting no time
we sent him there to work, and he is working.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
thanks_imjustlurking Donating Member (462 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-01-10 09:32 PM
Response to Original message
6. My hero!
I've been complaining about the "courtesy filibuster" for years. Didn't know until today that actually getting up and blathering was not actually required. Too bad someone in the Senate didn't notice this sooner.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
awoke_in_2003 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-01-10 09:56 PM
Response to Original message
7. I have been saying this for years...
go back to the old rules. Should have been done the second we took the senate- oh, I forgot, Harry Reid is the majority "leader". The backbone of a jellyfish that one has.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Mon May 06th 2024, 08:07 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » General Discussion: Presidency Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC