Senate: No 'magic' 60 possible (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid



Message

BitaTruble -> Senate: No 'magic' 60 possible (11/6/2008 11:18:31 AM)

With 55 dem senators it's no longer possible for the dems to hit that magic number of 60 to invoke cloture and silence filibusters. It might not be needed, but it's no longer a 'gimme' option.

Quickie Joe the Plumber lesson for those who don't know why 60 is so magical in the Senate.

First, the House has time limit rules, so filibuster isn't an option there. In the Senate, however, a single Senator can stand up and keep the floor for as long as s/he likes talking on any subject .. even those which have nothing to do with a bill which may be waiting for vote. The only way to shut someone up is for 3/5 of the sitting Senate to vote for cloture (which basically means .. shut the fuck up already, we're going to vote whether you like it or not.) In a full Senate which has all 100 seated, that means 60 votes are needed to invoke the 'shut the fuck up' rule and get on to the business at hand.

In the old days, a Senator actually had to stand up and talk non-stop for a filibuster, but these days one can simply use the 'threat' of filibuster to achieve the same end. So, Senator X doesn't want bill AA111 to pass. X stands up, says "I invoke filibuster" than can sit back down and no further action is allowed on that bill unless X revokes the filibuster or shut the fuck up cloture is voted on and passed by 3/5 majority.

This has post approved by Joe the Plumber. [8D]



slvemike4u -> RE: Senate: No 'magic' 60 possible (11/6/2008 11:23:14 AM)

So under the new "invoke the filibuster" rules you don't get that FrankCapra/Jimmy Stewart thing going on.....that sucks,the picture of Ted Stevens dropping dead on the Senate floor while filibusting was running through my mind(just kidding,even a felon like stevens shouldn't drop dead on the Senate floor)I'm slaveMike and I approved this message.



Musicmystery -> RE: Senate: No 'magic' 60 possible (11/6/2008 11:24:55 AM)

Hi Bita,

The number isn't as important as it sounds, however. Harry Reid can always pick off a few Republicans on a given issue. And from the other side----getting a block of Democratic Senators to walk in lock step is hardly a given either.

It IS, generally, a bigger issue in judicial appointments, though, and here the 60 count would be helpful to the Dems.

But governing is making choices and compromises, and hopefully we will now start to return to the days just a few decades ago when Senators of opposing parties got together and worked out differences.



DomKen -> RE: Senate: No 'magic' 60 possible (11/6/2008 11:29:52 AM)

The fact is cloture means debate is hard limited to, IIRC, 30 hours. However it has become common to not force a filibuster which, IMO, is dumb. I'm fine with filibuster as delay and as powerful symbol of opposition to a bill but it shouldn't be a means of completely stopping all legislation.

Senate rules allow a Senator to speak for an unlimited amount of time during debate on a bill but that rule does not allow for breaks or silence. The Senator must stand at the podium and speak. The rules need to actually be enforced.



BitaTruble -> RE: Senate: No 'magic' 60 possible (11/6/2008 11:38:36 AM)

Behave, Mike! Bad boy. [sm=crop.gif]

[8D]



slvemike4u -> RE: Senate: No 'magic' 60 possible (11/6/2008 11:47:53 AM)

Okay,I'm off to take a cold shower....thank's Celeste.



Cagey18 -> RE: Senate: No 'magic' 60 possible (11/6/2008 12:23:43 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: BitaTruble

With 55 dem senators it's no longer possible for the dems to hit that magic number of 60 to invoke cloture and silence filibusters. It might not be needed, but it's no longer a 'gimme' option.


Actually it's still an option.  They had 51 before (counting Lieberman and Sanders), and added 5 Tuesday night, bringing them to 56.  NBC and AP have today called Oregon for Merkley (D)--57.  Still open are:
- Jim Martin (GA--runoff on Dec 2, plus absentee ballots yet to be counted)
- Al Franken (MN--recount to be completed sometime in December)
- Begich (Alaska, 70,000 absentee ballots yet to be counted)

Did you read some news that I didn't?



BitaTruble -> RE: Senate: No 'magic' 60 possible (11/6/2008 12:48:35 PM)

Ah, I didn't count Lieberman or Sanders. I was going straight dems @ 49 with 5 seats added and 4 still possible. After Lieberman's wrist slap from Reid today and possibly losing his chair on the HS committee, I wouldn't count on him still caucusing with dems though it's still very up in the air at this point.



Irishknight -> RE: Senate: No 'magic' 60 possible (11/6/2008 12:56:33 PM)

Filibuster should go back to the old keep talking style.  This "I invoke filibuster" and then sit down shit is ridiculous.  If they don't have the balls to actually do it, then it shouldn't be an option.  All it is currently is obstructionism when someone doesn't get his/her way.
As for the magic number, I hope neither side ever achieves it again.  If they do, the people are probably fucked.



BitaTruble -> RE: Senate: No 'magic' 60 possible (11/6/2008 1:00:24 PM)

I would love to see it go back to the old 'diaper' days but I don't think it's likely.



rexrgisformidoni -> RE: Senate: No 'magic' 60 possible (11/6/2008 1:12:42 PM)

I can ramble for days and with enough coffee, no need to sleep. Give me a potted plant and we're good to go. I hope the dem's don't reach the magic 60, we'd be dicked for sure.



Cagey18 -> RE: Senate: No 'magic' 60 possible (11/6/2008 1:14:23 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: BitaTruble

Ah, I didn't count Lieberman or Sanders.

Believe me, Harry Reid does [:D]

I think Lieberman knows which side is really in charge now.  And actually his Senate voting record has been more liberal than Obama's--he just has a bug about the Iraq war.  But I don't see him caucusing with a losing side.

I'm wondering if his buttering up to McCain the past few months was to get the VP slot (which reportedly was offered, then withdrawn two hours later when Steve Schmidt convinced McCain to go with Palin).  Maybe he'll behave now that the GOP got so solidly trounced.



slvemike4u -> RE: Senate: No 'magic' 60 possible (11/6/2008 1:18:40 PM)

Lieberman can go fuck himself.Speaking at the RNC in support of McCain could be depicted as an act of loyalty to an old friend....going on the attack against his party's candidate at that occasion,following McCain around like a lap dog on the campaign....TOO MUCH.He lost the democratic nomination and ran as an independent,he is neither fish nor fowl at this point.I have zero respect for him.



FatDomDaddy -> RE: Senate: No 'magic' 60 possible (11/6/2008 1:22:59 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery

It IS, generally, a bigger issue in judicial appointments, though, and here the 60 count would be helpful to the Dems.

.


And the democracts perfected and used and used and used this tatcic to stall Bush appointments to the bench and other high offices.

It will be interesting to see their reaction if it is used against them.



Irishknight -> RE: Senate: No 'magic' 60 possible (11/6/2008 1:28:34 PM)

Even if they hit 60, they are not filibuster proof.  How often can you get all of them together to do anything?  At any given time at least 5-10 members of each party are out getting illegal gifts from lobbyists, partaking of prostitutes, and generally just not doing their jobs.  They probably need a magic 65 to be filibuster proof.



Musicmystery -> RE: Senate: No 'magic' 60 possible (11/6/2008 2:42:39 PM)

Also, (1) it's unlikely that the Dems will welcome Lieberman back to their caucus, and (2) unless the recount changes things, Franken will just narrowly lose.



slvemike4u -> RE: Senate: No 'magic' 60 possible (11/6/2008 2:50:34 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: FatDomDaddy

quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery

It IS, generally, a bigger issue in judicial appointments, though, and here the 60 count would be helpful to the Dems.

.


And the democracts perfected and used and used and used this tatcic to stall Bush appointments to the bench and other high offices.

It will be interesting to see their reaction if it is used against them.

Considering the qualifications of some of Bush's appointments,they didn't do enough.



Musicmystery -> RE: Senate: No 'magic' 60 possible (11/6/2008 3:30:12 PM)

He's right, though, mike---both sides have used this tactic.

But truly, while it's annoying---that's why the tactic exists. Congress was intentionally designed to make it difficult to railroad things through.

And since judicial appointments are the gift that keeps on giving, it's an appropriate time for a filibuster if the candidate is not palatable.

Bush keep putting forth right wing Conservatives. Had he proposed more moderate choices, he'd have enjoyed better success.

Republicans likewise blocked their share of Clinton's appointments.

Part of President Obama's tasks will be to try to get these diverse forces to work together. We'll see!



Cagey18 -> RE: Senate: No 'magic' 60 possible (11/6/2008 3:57:07 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery

Bush keep putting forth right wing Conservatives. Had he proposed more moderate choices, he'd have enjoyed better success.

Republicans likewise blocked their share of Clinton's appointments.


C'mon MM, don't confuse FatDomDaddy with facts--they hate that. [:D]



Evility -> RE: Senate: No 'magic' 60 possible (11/6/2008 4:19:43 PM)

I think the Dems would probably find a place for Lucifer in their caucus if if gave them absolute control.



Page: [1] 2   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
3.100586E-02