Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

BumRushDaShow

(167,657 posts)
37. You didn't read the link
Mon May 11, 2015, 03:57 AM
May 2015


To put the scale of the project in perspective, the namesake of the 1992 volume, Parliamentarian Emeritus Floyd M. Riddick, said in a 1978 interview that at that point, he had already researched more than a million precedents.

Several of them amount to legislative “magic tricks,” which skilled politicians can use to bend the rules. And others are just plain weird.

http://www.rollcall.com/issues/57_40/Riddicks-Tome-Unlocks-Quirky-Senate-Powers-209360-1.html?pg=2&dczone=news


Even from the preface per here - (PDF)

It should also be noted that certain language in some precedents has been modified in various instances to make the rulings of the Chair jibe with the rules as presently written. To illustrate: the use of "1 o'clock" and "2 o'clock" as stated in previous years by the Chair will now read "one hour after the Senate convenes" or "two hours after the Senate convenes." These changes in the standing rules of the Senate have been necessary in order to make the daily procedure of the Senate literally accurate in the definition of morning business and Morning Hour. Likewise, the language of the precedents cited in Senate Procedure have been so corrected.


So for example, the Senate can come into session at 2 pm and begin with "Morning Business".

They can do what they want and you have no choice in the matter.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

K&R... awoke_in_2003 May 2015 #1
It's shameful that this didn't happen decades ago. n/t winter is coming May 2015 #2
yes, it is. in this 'greatest, bestest, most wonderful country in the world", women still niyad May 2015 #3
I worked on that campaign.... Spitfire of ATJ May 2015 #11
I remember the bathroom argument. It's as if they didn't know we had unisex toilets CTyankee May 2015 #26
It's pathetic we even need an ERA Novara May 2015 #4
well, that was exactly what was meant, "all white, property-owning males are created equal" niyad May 2015 #6
I am surprised this current congress hasn't tried to repeal the 19th amendment etherealtruth May 2015 #5
actually, there have been proposals for that very thing. niyad May 2015 #7
Yes, they have. The GOP and Constitutionalist parties have both pushed this for decades. freshwest May 2015 #19
jeeezus... BlancheSplanchnik May 2015 #29
TIME IS NOT ON OUR SIDE. It's why I ignore more online. The real game is in the statehouses. freshwest May 2015 #31
k&r beam me up scottie May 2015 #8
wont have that jackass henry hyde messing w the vote in il this time. mopinko May 2015 #9
I still hate his rotting putrid corpse...... lastlib May 2015 #15
well, that. mopinko May 2015 #16
Fill the visitor galleries of these states with women. Spitfire of ATJ May 2015 #10
The ERA will never be passed I'm afraid... Archae May 2015 #12
That woman has been a thorn in our side for decades. Maybe she's one of the undead? calimary May 2015 #14
Of course. Archae May 2015 #21
Exactly. Why do these people want to take all the advantages for themselves and then calimary May 2015 #22
Yet another reason why we must retake Congress. okasha May 2015 #13
It passed Congress in 1972. They can't do it alone. The states defeated the ERA: freshwest May 2015 #25
K&R Terra Alta May 2015 #17
Somebody should ask Jeb Bush why he opposed ratifying the ERA as FL governor in 2003. seafan May 2015 #18
Would it even be valid? davidn3600 May 2015 #20
The linked article is confusing on that score. There are two different approaches. Jim Lane May 2015 #23
Is there a list of the states that have ratified it! n/t patricia92243 May 2015 #24
Ratifications 1972–1977 progressoid May 2015 #28
How can they extend the deadline without going back in time to before 1982? Reter May 2015 #27
Just like BumRushDaShow May 2015 #30
Key words "about to expire" Reter May 2015 #35
You didn't read the link BumRushDaShow May 2015 #37
Let the brassiere bonfire begin... AngryAmish May 2015 #32
Lets assume this amendment jamzrockz May 2015 #33
R#76 & K nt UTUSN May 2015 #34
Great. Now we can have a second go at being told we aren't equal. n/t Ms. Toad May 2015 #36
. . . . niyad May 2015 #38
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»The ERA was Re-introduced...»Reply #37