Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Fillibuster 101

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 » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
paineinthearse Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-01-05 02:28 PM
Original message
Fillibuster 101
Article URL: http://slate.msn.com/id/2078519/

<snip>

A filibuster is allowed because the Constitution gives each house of Congress the right to "determine the Rules of its Proceedings." That means the Senate can run itself however it sees fit. With one short-lived exception, the Senate had no rule until 1917 to halt discussion on anything—reflecting the body's long-standing commitment to unlimited debate. A single senator thus had the power to hold the entire body hostage on an issue, so long as he was prepared to keep talking about it. Hence the term "filibuster," derived from the Spanish filibustero, or freebooter, meaning "pirate." (That word ultimately goes back to a pair of Dutch words that mean "free" and "booty"—which may or may not be relevant to goings-on in the Senate.)

Technically, a filibuster is made possible by Senate Rule XIX, the rule governing floor debate, which directs any senator who wants to speak to "rise and address the Presiding Officer." Once recognized by the presiding officer, a senator can keep speaking as long as he or she wishes, day and night, provided that the senator: 1) remain standing and 2) stay in the Senate chamber. This can be hard on: 1) the knees and 2) the bladder, which is why Strom Thurmond deliberately dehydrated himself in a sauna before taking to the floor for 24 hours and 18 minutes to rail against a civil rights bill in 1957.

While orating, a senator is permitted to drink only water or milk—the latter according to a ruling found in the encyclopedic Riddick's Senate Procedure, a 1,500-page volume containing 200 years of rulings on arcane matters of Senate governance. Also, the senator may only speak two separate times on any one issue. Facing these constraints, senators who want to filibuster may tag-team, each sermonizing as long as possible—often until hoarse—before yielding the floor to the next speaker. Everyone is free to deliver a second speech on the issue, after which they can make motions or offer amendments—taking turns expounding upon those, too. The filibuster process can last for weeks or more, the record being 75 days in 1964.

Nor must a senator confine herself to the issue or nominee in question. Under Senate rules, senators can talk about anything when they have the floor. In 1935, Sen. Huey Long of Louisiana suspended passage of a bill by lecturing on the Constitution, section by section. When he ran out of text, he recited recipes for fried oysters and something called "potlikkers." In the early 1990s, Sen. Al D'Amato resorted to song—including, one observer recalls—The Yellow Rose of Texas. And on Wednesday, Sen. Robert Byrd kept tradition alive by reminiscing about the courtship of his wife.

The strategy behind the filibuster is obvious—hold up other Senate business, creating pressure to put aside nominees or bills as everything else on the agenda gathers dust. The filibuster tends to be more effective near the end of a term, when Congress is racing to push through as much legislation as it can. But it can be a powerful tool at any point, signaling to the president, public, and press the heartfelt views of minority senators. Southern Democrats in the '50s and '60s, for example, threw everything they had into filibusters against civil rights legislation. They failed, but they stayed in the headlines for months.

more....

===================

http://rules.senate.gov/senaterules/rule19.htm

Standing Rules of The Senate
RULE XIX

DEBATE

1. (a) When a Senator desires to speak, he shall rise and address the Presiding Officer, and shall not proceed until he is recognized, and the Presiding Officer shall recognize the Senator who shall first address him. No Senator shall interrupt another Senator in debate without his consent, and to obtain such consent he shall first address the Presiding Officer, and no Senator shall speak more than twice upon any one question in debate on the same legislative day without leave of the Senate, which shall be determined without debate.

(b) At the conclusion of the morning hour at the beginning of a new legislative day or after the unfinished business or any pending business has first been laid before the Senate on any calendar day, and until after the duration of three hours of actual session after such business is laid down except as determined to the contrary by unanimous consent or on motion without debate, all debate shall be germane and confined to the specific question then pending before the Senate.

2. No Senator in debate shall, directly or indirectly, by any form of words impute to another Senator or to other Senators any conduct or motive unworthy or unbecoming a Senator.

3. No Senator in debate shall refer offensively to any State of the Union.

4. If any Senator, in speaking or otherwise, in the opinion of the Presiding Officer transgress the rules of the Senate the Presiding Officer shall, either on his own motion or at the request of any other Senator, call him to order; and when a Senator shall be called to order he shall take his seat, and may not proceed without leave of the Senate, which, if granted, shall be upon motion that he be allowed to proceed in order, which motion shall be determined without debate. Any Senator directed by the Presiding Officer to take his seat, and any Senator requesting the Presiding Officer to require a Senator to take his seat, may appeal from the ruling of the Chair, which appeal shall be open to debate.

5. If a Senator be called to order for words spoken in debate, upon the demand of the Senator or of any other Senator, the exceptionable words shall be taken down in writing, and read at the table for the information of the Senate.

6. Whenever confusion arises in the Chamber or the galleries, or demonstrations of approval or disapproval are indulged in by the occupants of the galleries, it shall be the duty of the Chair to enforce order on his own initiative and without any point of order being made by a Senator.

7. No Senator shall introduce to or bring to the attention of the Senate during its sessions any occupant in the galleries of the Senate. No motion to suspend this rule shall be in order, nor may the Presiding Officer entertain any request to suspend it by unanimous consent.

8. Former Presidents of the United States shall be entitled to address the Senate upon appropriate notice to the Presiding Officer who shall thereupon make the necessary arrangements.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Just Me Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-01-05 02:33 PM
Response to Original message
1. Thank you. I'm glad they can tag-team. I hope they go on forever.
:bounce:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
liberal N proud Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-01-05 02:34 PM
Response to Original message
2. Thanks for the civic lesson.
:thumbsup:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Withywindle Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-01-05 02:36 PM
Response to Original message
3. Fascinating!
Well, in theory, we have 45 champion endurance babblers, yes?


Why milk, I wonder?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
paineinthearse Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-01-05 02:49 PM
Response to Reply #3
4. To "...sharpen you up for a bit of the old ultraviolence" ???

"There was me, that is Alex, and my three droogs, Georgie, Pete and Dim. And we sat in the Korova Milk bar trying to make up our rassoodocks what to do with the evening. The Korova sold milk plus, milk plus velocet, synthemesc or drencrom which was what we were drinking. And this would sharpen you up for a bit of the old ultraviolence"
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NewYorkerfromMass Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-01-05 03:46 PM
Response to Reply #4
7. But that was "milk plus"
never just plain old milk for the droogies.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
REACTIVATED IN CT Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-01-05 03:10 PM
Response to Reply #3
5. Endurance
I wonder if they use foley catheters and bags ???
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
paineinthearse Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-01-05 03:42 PM
Response to Reply #5
6. ewwwwwwww lol nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
flpoljunkie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-01-05 03:47 PM
Response to Original message
8. AP says no fililbuster.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A54434-2005Feb1.html

Dems Won't Delaying Gonzales Appointment


By JESSE J. HOLLAND
The Associated Press

Tuesday, February 1, 2005; 2:52 PM

WASHINGTON - Democrats won't try to filibuster Alberto Gonzales' nomination to be attorney general but will hold extensive debates in the Senate over his role in developing the Bush administration's policies on treating foreign detainees, the Senate's top Democrat said Tuesday.

"There will be an up-or-down vote," Senate Democratic Leader Harry Reid of Nevada told reporters after the Democrats huddled together for their weekly planning session.

A filibuster, a parliamentary tactic for delaying Senate action, would require Republicans, who hold a 55-44 majority in the Senate, to win over at least five Democrats - or four Democrats plus Vermont Sen. James Jeffords, an independent - to put Gonzales in office.

Reid predicted that at least 25 or 30 Democrats would vote against Gonzales but said "there was a decision made not to filibuster."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
paineinthearse Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-01-05 04:43 PM
Response to Original message
9. Kennedy seems to have a large head of steam....
could he be warming up for a fillibuster?
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 Tue Jan 14th 2025, 02:37 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) 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