What would it take to change the number required to end a filibuster from 60 to 55?

[Tony_FLADEM]

Would a simple majority of 51 voting to do this be sufficient? I think they need to do this.

[pinto]

1. It would take 60 votes to avoid a filibuster and get to a vote.

And there's the rub.

:banghead:

[WeDidIt]

3. No, invoking cloture for a rules change requires 2/3

67 votes are required for cloture in any debate regarding the rules of the Senate.

It's in the rules.

[pinto]

5. Ah thanks. Forgot that. Yeah, it'd be a rule change.

:hi:

[FBaggins]

7. Unless you get the parliamentarian to say that it ISN'T a rule change

Then it only requires a simple majority to uphold the ruling.

This was essentially the "nuclear option" from a few years ago.

Then, of course, it ends up going to court over whether it really was a rule change or not.

[Earth Bound Misfit]

6. That's some catch ....

...that Catch-22

[WeDidIt]

2. It takes 67 votes to invoke cloture for changing the rules of the Senate

Yes, a 2/3 majority is required under the rules.

[pnwmom]

4. Then what happens someday if 55 Rethug Senators vote to privatize Social Security?

Or to end Medicare?

We wouldn't be able to filibuster them.

If the number is too low, laws would be flip-flopping back and forth with every new Senate.

[MineralMan]

8. A very good point, indeed. That's essentially why the

cloture rule is in place. There have been many times when it has been a very good thing.