Dems forced a Senate debate on Rice, how about for Gonzales?

[MadLinguist]

Does anyone know what procedure is required in order to force a Senate debate, as opposed to just a roll-call Senate vote? I want to hound the right people about not confirming Gonzales, and I think the best hope is getting a senate debate going. Should we should contact the Dems on the judiciary committee to do that? I have been unable to find anything out about the rules on senate debate, despite having visited a lot of political action sites today.

[WildEyedLiberal]

1. Won't there automatically be one since there were dissenting votes

On the committee? I thought that was how it was determined. I could be wrong, though. I thought Boxer and Kerry's nay votes are what sparked the Condi debate.

[MadLinguist]

4. I'm not sure if that how it works.

In a NYTimes article "Democrats Delay Final Approval of Rice for State Dept." on Jan 20
http://query.nytimes.com/search/restricted/article?res=F10B12FC3B5C0C738EDDA80894DD404482

it says

"Underscoring the Democrats' dissatisfaction, Senator Robert C. Byrd, an outspoken critic of the decision to go to war, announced late in the day that he would not allow the Senate to approve Ms. Rice without a few days of consideration of her lengthy testimony, and at least a token debate on the floor. His refusal to join in the unanimous consent of all senators for a quick vote effectively torpedoed the administration's hopes to have her nomination approved Thursday"

Byrd is not a member of the Senate the committee on Foreign Relations, so it doesn't seem like a "no" vote from the relevant committee is the mechanism that held up Cunningsleazy's confirmation. I'm extremely encouraged by the fact that all 8 Democratic members of the judiciary committee voted "no" on Gonzales (including, miraculously, Schumer) but I don't know that those votes guarantee a Senate debate. I want a big stinking howling debate.

[merwin]

2. Considering more people have voted against Gonzales than Rice already,

there will most definately be a lot of debate

[RaulVB]

3. 41 NO votes would block the process

That's what we need.