Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: ambrose

I'm also an old fashioned kind of guy.

But Bill Frist hasn't got the power to force an old fashioned filibuster. The Senate rules were changed a long time ago, were adopted more or less intact at the beginning of this session, and can't now be changed except on a 60-40 vote to do so.

Too bad. Now we have filibuster lite, for good or ill. Seems like ill to me since it allows minority obstructionism as no real political cost.

The reason why we can pull off the "consstitutional option" is that it doesn't actually change any rule of the Senate. It is simply a ruling by the presiding officer that the filibuster rules don't apply to advise and consent to judicial appointments. Once made, the ruling stands unless overridden by a majority vote.

It's definitely the way to get this done.


16 posted on 05/10/2005 12:17:14 AM PDT by John Valentine (Credit to Swordmaker; this is his post from a related thread.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies ]


To: John Valentine

Then let the "compromise" be to force actual filibusters. A minority of 41 can have endless debate IF those 41 senators continuously hold the floor, without disruption. If one of them leaves even for a minute (excepting say, 5 minute potty breaks, to preserve the dignity of the senate chamber), the presiding officer can order the debate ended.

Let's see how long Barbara Boxer will put up with sleeping in a cot on the senate floor, right next to a snoring Robert Byrd.


24 posted on 05/10/2005 12:41:25 AM PDT by ambrose ("They killed the Giggler, man. THEY KILLED THE GIGGLER!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson