You have commented 339 times on Rantburg.

Your Name
Your e-mail (optional)
Website (optional)
My Original Nic        Pic-a-Nic        Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Bold Italic Underline Strike Bullet Blockquote Small Big Link Squish Foto Photo
Submit your comments on this article
-Short Attention Span Theater-
Dem proposes change to filibuster rules
2010-03-24
Senators who want to use a filibusters to block consideration of a bill would have to actually debate the issues on the Senate floor under a "Mr. Smith bill" introduced today by Sen. Frank Lautenberg.

"Filibusters should happen on Capitol Hill, not from the Capital Grille. If any of my colleagues feel strongly enough about a bill or nomination to stop all work in the Senate, they should have no problem standing on the Senate floor to explain their opposition to the American public," said Lautenberg, D-N.J.
It was the Dhimmicrats who first started doing filibusters long distance ...
While actor Jimmy Stewart immortalized the filibuster in the film "Mr. Smith Goes to Washington," the Senate no longer operates that way.

Currently, most Senate business operates on "unanimous consent," where a single member can block the chamber from considering a measure or nomination without stating a reason.

To get around an objection, the majority leader wants has to invoke cloture to "end debate," even if the objection has never been stated publicly on the floor. Cloture requires 60 votes, and once granted, several days must pass again before a final vote can occur.

Under Lautenberg's bill, the leader could require when making a cloture motion that anyone objecting to a final vote come to the floor and remain there discussing their objection. Once the speaker or speaker gives up the floor, a vote could be held immediately.

Daniel Foster at National Review notes:

Of course, the rule change would be subject to a 60-vote cloture procedure, and would require 67 votes to pass.
How ironic!
The bar would be lowered significantly at the beginning of the next Congress in January 2011, however. At that point, only a simple majority will be required to change the Senate's standing rules.
In other words, the change could occur just as the Dems slide into minority status and really, really, really need the filibuster bad in order to stop the repeal of Obamacare.
Not likely, but wouldn't that be delicious?
Posted by:Mike

#3  I thought congress did not need rules?
Posted by: newc   2010-03-24 20:51  

#2  Lautenberg was also illegally (with a corrupt NJ Supreme Court's backing) installed after the filing deadline when Bob "The Torch" Torricelli was embroiled in scandal and cratering in the polls. Frank outta be hiding in shame, but Dems don't feel shame and embarrassment like psychologically normal humans do
Posted by: Frank G   2010-03-24 17:17  

#1  The Foster line on this was what came to mind, and also, I can't get over how it's Frank Lautenberg who is making this suggestion. Isn't he sick with some sort of nonlethal but debilitating cancer?

The Democratic side of the aisle is just choked with ruinous relics like Byrd, who are propped up by their aides and vote proxies and kept in a cryo chamber when not needed.
Posted by: Mitch H.   2010-03-24 16:34  

00:00