The Senate Pajama Party - help a Canadian understand?

[crappyjazz]

This stuff makes my brain hurt, but tell me if I'm on the right track? somebody? please?

The Repubs are asking that the amendment require a 60 majority vote? and the Democrats are planning to filibuster that requirement? If that is correct, is it normal for one side or the other to demand how many votes should make a majority or not? Ugh, I'm confused by this really.

On another note, McCain looks visibly pissed that he might have to stay up all night :rofl

[bryant69]

1. Well usually when there is a filibuster, they just took it as read

that there would be a filibuster and pretend like it happened. In this case, as I understand it, Reid is making them actually do the filibuster, as opposed to politely saying "Well you threatened and we can't bust it, so there you go."

I could be wrong.

Bryant
Check it out --> http://politicalcomment.blogspot.com

[wryter2000]

3. That's the way I see it, too. n/t

n/t

[wryter2000]

2. It is confusing

The Dems want to pass something to bring the troops home. On a straight, upperdown vote, they'll win. However, the R's can keep them from voting by continuing the debate. It takes 60 votes to bring cloture -- a demand that they end debate and have the upperdown vote.

Recently, the Dems have, as a matter of courtesy, let the matter slide when the R's show they have enough votes to filibuster. This time, Harry Reid said, "If you want to filibuster, you'll have to do it for real."

[crappyjazz]

10. Okay I think that is helping to clear this for me

So basically, the Repubs would keep blabbing long enough and the Dems wouldn't have 60 votes to shut them up and make them vote? So instead of actually making them blab, they'd just say "okay, we'll just forget it"? Wow, that blows my mind.

So now, the Dems are saying, go ahead make our day (night) and debate to your little hearts content; we'll still be sitting here ready to vote when you all shut up?

Interesting and thank you (if I got it right I hope). :)

[wryter2000]

15. That's it

It probably won't work, but it'll make them pay a price, and they'll all have to stand on the floor arguing (for hours) about how it's wrong to bring the troops home.

[icymist]

23. Meanwhile, as the repubs are blabbing away, it gives the Dems...

more time to sway even more Repubs to their way of thinking on this matter. Common folk can even get involved by writing or phoning their elected Repub senators, to sway their thought, as this happens.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

4. Basically, Republicans threatened to filibuster...

And Democrats are calling that bluff.

[TayTay]

6. Yup. That's it in a nutshell

Here's the rulebook.

cloture: page 282

http://www.gpoaccess.gov/riddick/browse.html

[poverlay]

5. The re pigs are trying to avoid voting on the war so they don't get

in trouble with their constituents on the poison pill that is the Iraq war. Reid is simply trying to force them to vote their conscience and buck the bush/rove pressure cooker.

I'm not sure how successfull it will be, but it should be interesting.

[blogslut]

7. Here's my interpretation

The process works like this:

1) Senator introduces a bill/amendment

2) Debate over the bill is held

3) Debate ends, time to close the debate via a vote for cloture.

4) Vote on the bill

The problem:

A cloture vote (60 votes) can be stalled by the threat of a filibuster. The repubs have threatened a filibuster on practically every single bill brought forth by the Dems.

Harry Reid is forcing the repubs to go ahead and debate for 30 hours - a kind of filibuster-buster. After the thirty hours THEY HAVE TO VOTE FOR CLOTURE. Than the majority Senators will decide the fate of the bill with an up/down vote.

[MiniMe]

9. I don't think that they hate to vote FOR cloture after 30 hours, they

have to vote ON cloture. They still won't achieve cloture, but it will be obvious who is obstructing the vote.

[blogslut]

11. probably

I dunno. I'm the gal that drew in sketchbooks during Government class. :)

[wryter2000]

16. Heard on AAR the other day

A Dem said that a Repug told him outright that their strategy is to block everything the Dems want to do so that they can claim that the Dem Congress accomplished nothing. Nice bunch, huh?

[blogslut]

19. Oh, they're sweet as peaches

Rotten peaches

[MiniMe]

8. You need 60 votes to end debate (invoke cloture)

So what the dems are saying, is if you don't want to end debate, then debate the bill. The republicans don't want to debate it, it is a losing proposition, they just want to say we don't want to end debate.

[wryter2000]

18. Does anyone know what happens in a 60/40 split?

I've never figured that out. Also, what if there are only 90 Senators there...do they still need 40? Do we still need 60?

I'd better go lie down. :)

[MiniMe]

24. 60 aye votes invokes cloture (ends debate)

It doesn't matter how many nays there are, only that there are 60 yea's. If you only had 60 people in the chamber, and they all voted yea, then debate would end. How is that headache? :evilgrin:

[wryter2000]

25. It's better now

Thanks. :thumbsup:

[DeSwiss]

12. In the US Senate...

...there are rules that require that there be 60 votes to cut off debate on an issue so that a vote can take place. This is the "cloture" rule. In this case the issues relate to the withdrawal of US forces from Iraq as well and an amendment that's been proposed to be added to the legislation authored by Sen. Jim Webb that would increase the amount of time between deployment rotations into combat zones by US solders. Since the Dems do not have 60 votes to cut off debate, they are forcing the Repugs to filibuster (keep running there mouths so that a vote can't take place before an adjournment) in order to avoid the up or down vote on the legislation.

The Repugs DO NOT want to be forced to defend why (with a large majority of Americans against the war -- including many Republican voters) as having voted against bringing the troops home, nor as having voted to keep the short deployment rotations that are currently in place -- since they claim they "support the troops" so much more than Dems. Such a vote would give a lie to their positions and they don't want to have to go back home and campaign against someone with a voting record like that.

As for McCain. He's always looked that way. Its just getting worse....

[crappyjazz]

13. Thank you all, the little time I have to spend here

is always edifying ... now I'm pondering whether it might be worth staying up all night for - it's history after all isn't it? :)

Thanks again

[wryter2000]

17. Not worth watching

They often end up reading the phone book. Anything to keep talking.

[in_cog_ni_to]

21. I'm hoping to stay tuned as long as I can tonight. I LOVE, LOVE, LOVE this stuff.

It should be VERY entertaining, but my son's having surgery tomorrow and I have to get up early.:(

They'll all get bitchy after a while and start snipping at each other. Personally, I'm hoping for a knock-down, drag-out, but that's unlikely to happen. How they control themselves, I'll never know.

Try to watch. It should be FUN!

[LSK]

14. 60 votes are needed to move a bill to final vote

[kansasblue]

20. a filibuster uses a rule.....which is really kind of a good rule....

The rule is that you can't take a vote until everyone has had a chance to say all they have to say. Talk it out, give all the arguments and facts you want.

So as long as someone talking about the bill (or something) and says they have more to say then the vote is delayed. Sounds good on paper and normally is a good thing. But what if you want to just keep taking and taking (not for the purpose of arguments and facts but) to delay the bill (or amendment in this case) from ever passing. This is a filibuster. Talk it to death.

To stop debate and call a vote take 60 votes. Normally no big thing, just a procedural thing. But now the Republican are using this extended debate (filibuster) to prevent a vote on a anti-war amendment. It a tool for any minority party.

As others have said, in the past rather than tie up the Senate with a filibuster Reid has just acknowledge the filibuster and withdrew the bill or amendment.

This week he says.... "earn it". Do the filibuster. Debate away if you want debate. The result is a major news story as the Senate goes into extended debate...into the night...on the war.

Don't know if the Dems have the votes to stop the debate and vote on the amendment. But its great political show.

(correct me here team if I got anything wrong)

[LynneSin]

22. It's the republicans that are filibustering

They are making it that you can't vote on this bill until 60 senators agree to end the filibuster.

Personally I have no problem with filibustering regardless of the party. I think it's a great feature to help keep power in control. Problem is that for 6 years the Repukes badmouthed democrats for using the filibuster (mainly with Bush's outrageous right-wing fundie judges) but now that the shoe is on the other foot - it's the greatest invention ever.

But then again this is the party that embraces a Diaper Fetish while condemning those who aren't 'straight like me'