If the Democratic Senators just walked out...

[VelmaD]

I was just wondering if anyone here knew off the top of their head what the rules were in the Senate on quorums and the number that must be present to do any official business.

I'm just thinking, the Texas State Representatives know of this nice hotel in Ardmore, Oklahoma where they could hole up for a while if it meant bringing the Senate to a complete standstill.

I was just wondering if the rules in the US Senate would allow the same kind of action to work.

[Freddie Stubbs]

1. Only a majority is needed to conduct business

[unblock]

2. unfortunately, i think something puny like 16 senators is a quorum.

a walkout would be symbolic only. hell of a symbol, but it wouldn't actually stop senate business, afaik.


ON EDIT: technically, 51 senators are necessary (google is my friend), HOWEVER, the senate usually "presumes" a quorum is present unless it is challenged by a quorum call. so perversely, someone trying to prevent a quorum would actually have to be present in order to ask for a quorum call. if the numbers were just right, that one person might satisfy the quorum.

[Deep13]

3. Maybe, but on Robert's Rules of Order, a quorum ...

... consists of a mere majority of the members. If the Senate has the same rule, just the Rs make a quorum. I don't know what the Senate's quorum rule is.

[Armstead]

4. I wondred a variation of the same questoin

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x235018

[bluestateguy]

5. A majority is needed for a quorum

We are going to lose eventually on Alito, but lets lose fighting the good fight--with a fillibuster.

[michiganbuckeye1970]

6. Let's shut down the senate

It's an election year, not much will really get done. Reid should tell Frist, hey, you got one chance to table this candidate or we will shut this motherfucker down. Promise endless filibusters for the rest of the year.

Go out to the public and say with recent information about how corrupt this president is, we cannot proceede with the business of running this country until we know more about what really happened...with everything.

The dems could begin holding hearings, starting with 9/11 and moving forward.

Tell the American people there is far too much at stake. Drastic measures must be taken.

Just say that in good conscious we cannot pass any more bills, confirm any more appointees, until we have a better idea of the truth. What has this president done. Did he lie. Did he break the law.

The american people love radical tactics...It's exciting...It's interesting. I think it would have a very good chance of succeeding.

[bigtree]

7. I'm with you on this. There has to come a point where these folks

just throw down and refuse to be played any further. There has to be some way for them to agree to keep the necessary functions of government the legislative branch is responsible for going, while at the same time, refuse to allow anything to move foward that isn't essential and directed to their oversight responsibilities of the Executive.

[sui generis]

8. well and if they chickenshit out on us

and refuse to stand up to this nomination in a meaningful way, by filibuster or by walkout, I'll continue to post here, but I will no longer consider myself a democrat or a supporter of democrats.

A liberal progressive anti-authoritarian for sure! Just not a rank and file dem any more. I'm just sick and tired of having my support taken for granted by people who won't fight for the very democracy that allows them to hold office.

[michiganbuckeye1970]

10. you're right

Last year we were all but promised that action would be taken on all Bush judical nominations. The republicans made their little threat and the dems turned over like dogs and pissed all over themselves.

There was suppose to be huge show-downs over SC nominees. Nothing happened with Roberts. And now this. Much talking, but no real action.

Americans like bold action. That's why the republicans have been winning the swing voters.

The Dems are playing all of this too carefully...almost like the are playing not to lose. If you don't play to win, you probably won't.

[ticapnews]

9. They don't need to walk out

C-SPAN hounds will know that everytime a Senator speaks they ask unanimous consent to revise and extend remarks for printing in the Congressional record. This is always granted. No reason the Democrats can't object and force a vote on the issue every single time any Senator makes a speech. I believe there is also a rule that requires reading of the text of every bill that comes before the Senate. This has been done away with since most bills now are so long. The Democrats could require that every bill be read word-for-word when it is introduced. The budget bill alone would take several weeks to read, so that would slow things down a little. :) There are all kinds of procedural tactics the Democrats can use rather than staging a walk out.