I have some questions concerning filibusters

[Phoebe Loosinhouse]

As far as I am aware, a filibuster is used by a party who wants to delay a final vote on a bill.

What happens during the filibuster to the bill itself? Is it still subject to change? Is the idea that the filibuster forces unwanted compromises? What if no compromises are struck? How does a filibuster end?

Say the Republicans decide to filibuster(which I think would be very entertaining. I would love to see them crying, sweating, ranting, having their voices become hoarse, fainting, growing obese from eating pizza. . .).

Could Democrats speak as well? Or does it have to be all Republicans all the time? I'd love to see some of our best, most articulate Dems just taking apart their arguments one by one and making them look like the idiots they are. Imagine Sheldon Whitehouse up as the counter to Jeff Sessions. Imagine Al Franken as the counter to Chuck Grassley.

[unhappycamper]

1. Here you go:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Filibuster


United States

The term first came into use in the United States Senate, where Senate rules permit a senator, or a series of senators, to speak for as long as they wish and on any topic they choose, unless a 3/5ths of the Senate (60 out of 100 Senators elected and sworn), brings debate to a close by invoking cloture. (For changing of senate rules the pre-1975 rule of a super-majority of senators present, i.e. 67 senators at most, is still used).<9>
Procedural filibuster

In current practice, Senate Rule 22 permits filibusters in which actual continuous floor speeches are not required, although the Senate Majority Leader may require an actual traditional filibuster if he or she so chooses. This threat of a filibuster where no floor speech and no quorum is required may, therefore, be more powerful than an actual filibuster, which would require attendance by a quorum of Senators as well as the physical presence of the Senators speaking.

Previously, the filibustering senator(s) could delay voting only by making an endless speech. Currently, they only need to indicate that they are filibustering, thereby preventing the Senate from moving on to other business until the motion is withdrawn or enough votes are gathered for cloture.
Preparations

Preparations for a traditional filibuster can be very elaborate. Sometimes cots are brought into the hallways or cloakrooms for senators to sleep on. While in a filibuster the senator talking must remain in the same spot and is only allowed to filibuster twice in a legislative day. A legislative day lasts until the debate is adjourned, which can take days. According to Newsweek:

They used to call it 'taking to the diaper,' a phrase that referred to the preparation undertaken by a prudent senator before an extended filibuster. Strom Thurmond visited a steam room before his filibuster in order to dehydrate himself so he could drink without urinating. An aide stood by in the cloakroom with a pail in case of emergency.<10>

Filibusters have become much more common in recent decades. Twice as many filibusters took place in the 1991-1992 legislative session as took place in the entire nineteenth century.<11>

[elocs]

2. More on the filibuster, or, it's not "Mr. Smith Goes to Washington:

www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/02/23/the-myth-of-the-filibuste_n_169117.html

The Myth Of The Filibuster: Dems Can't Make Republicans Talk All Night

Hoping for a C-SPAN spectacle of GOP obstruction, some impatient Democrats are urging Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) to call Republicans on their filibuster bluff.

House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-MD) made a plea typical of the genre, recently telling Politico that Reid should force Republicans into a filibustering talk-a-thon, "so that the American people can see who's undermining action." By threatening a filibuster, the shrunken bloc of 41 GOP senators has just enough members to prevent a vote, requiring Democrats to make concessions to pick off a few moderate Republicans.

Reid has heard the calls. But his answer will surely disappoint: Sorry. It can't happen. Reid's office has studied the history of the filibuster and analyzed what options are available. The resulting memo was provided to the Huffington Post and it concludes that a filibustering Senator "can be forced to sit on the floor to keep us from voting on that legislation for a finite period of time according to existing rules but he/she can't be forced to keep talking for an indefinite period of time."

Bob Dove, who worked as a Senate parliamentarian from 1966 until 2001, knows Senate rules as well as anyone on the planet. The Reid analysis, he says, is "exactly correct."

To get an idea of what the scene would look like on the Senate floor if Democrats tried to force Republicans to talk out a filibuster, turn on C-SPAN on any given Saturday. Hear the classical music? See the blue carpet behind the "Quorum Call" logo? That would be the resulting scene if Democrats forced a filibuster and the GOP chose not to play along. As both Reid's memo and Dove explain, only one Republican would need to monitor the Senate floor. If the majority party tried to move to a vote, he could simply say, "I suggest the absence of a quorum."

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

3. Anyone can talk, but no one has to.

A filibuster need not be anything but "I suggest the absence of a quorum" or a series of failed cloture votes. You can't force them to speak if they don't want to.