Can someone remind me? When did the 60 vote rule start?

[PlanetBev]

All I remember is Cheney breaking the 50-50 tie when the Senate was in Repuke hands. Now we have to get 60 votes. What the hell happened and who the hell agreed to it?

[sasha031]

1. it was in the Bush yrs

the repubs controlled both houses, not sure of the exact yr.
it should be changed.

[Kennah]

2. 1789

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Filibuster_in_the_U.S._Senate

[elocs]

3. Google is your friend and a wealth of information on the subject. n/t

[housewolf]

4. I don't remember but it was 67 previoiusly

I think it was in the 1980's, but prior to that it took 67 votes to overcome a fillibuster

[emulatorloo]

5. 60 votes to get cloture, simple majority to pass a bill once it has gotten over that hurdle.

Don't you remember the Bushies bitching about "THIS DESERVES AN UP OR DOWN VOTE!!!!!"

[Ter]

6. Lots of different answers in this thread

They range from 1789 to the 2000's. :)

[Exilednight]

12. Sadly, Bush always got his up or down vote. On the other hand, Obama refuses to fight for .........

such things. We can whine and moan over all the bad shit Bush did to this country, and lord knows I've done my fair share, but he did know how to use the bully-pulpit to great effectiveness, using nothing more than over simplified bumper sticker slogans.

[Clio the Leo]

7. God handed it down in the Garden of Eden...

.... as a punishment for man's disobedience. (It was either that or no chocolate and Eve got to pick.)

[quaker bill]

8. The rule has been in place for a long time

but the tradition by both parties was not to use it except in the worst of circumstances. This deal held up over the centuries. With the 2008 election, Republicans pitched tradition over the rail and now use it constantly to slow or stop business in the senate. Reform is needed not because the rule exists, but because it is being abused.

[kentuck]

9. Isn't that the Byrd rule?

60 votes to shut down debate?

[treestar]

10. 1975

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Filibuster_in_the_U.S._Senate

Before that, it was 67.

[ljm2002]

11. As soon as the Democrats got the majority, silly! n/t

[craigmatic]

13. It was either the 60's or 70's. Bush had senate structure on his side.

The senate is useless because it's designed to be conservative.

[Exilednight]

14. Here's the other part of the rule..............

the Senate leader can actually force the debate. In other words, he can actually force those who object to actually stand up and argue their point - hence a real filibuster would have occur. Eventually, once every Senator had their turn, an up and down vote can take place. Personally, this would be my option. I would open debate, shut the doors and hold everyone in chamber until debate is over - and surprisingly, this has actually happened in the past. Two or three times of forcing the Republicans to play their hand and they would give up the tactic pretty quickly.