HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » I don't understand why th...

Wed Jun 2, 2021, 01:55 PM

I don't understand why the GOP isn't being forced to do an actual talking filibuster

and you stay ON SUBJECT, with no breaks - bathroom or any other kinds.

Why are they still getting away with lazy filibuster votes??

4 replies, 524 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 4 replies Author Time Post
Reply I don't understand why the GOP isn't being forced to do an actual talking filibuster (Original post)
TomDaisy Jun 2021 OP
USAFRetired_Liberal Jun 2021 #1
marble falls Jun 2021 #2
leftieNanner Jun 2021 #3
USAFRetired_Liberal Jun 2021 #4

Response to TomDaisy (Original post)

Wed Jun 2, 2021, 01:59 PM

1. The filibuster was changed in the 1970's

Eliminated the need to stay and talk, and also eliminated the requirement for 2/3 of Senators present to 3/5 of ALL senators, yeah 2/3 is more than 3/5 so one would think lowering it to 3/5 would be better to end a filibuster, but the difference is that a senator had to be present in order to count in the 2/3.....for some reason, senators thought that these changes would end the gridlock and help to pass more bills, but it actually encouraged more gridlock and filibusters...I will try and find the reference.

Edit - https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.history.com/.amp/topics/us-government/history-of-the-filibuster

Changes in senate practice would eventually curb the drama of the filibuster. In the early 1970s, Senate leaders adopted changes that allowed more than one bill or matter to be pending on the floor at once. Before, with only one bill under consideration at a time, a filibuster could stop all other matters in the Senate—as long as a senator kept talking. Now, with multiple measures moving at once, leadership can simply set aside a controversial bill as theoretical “debate” continues, and move onto other matters in the meantime.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TomDaisy (Original post)

Wed Jun 2, 2021, 02:00 PM

2. Because the GOP under Reagan fixed it that way. We Democrats used the filibuster the way it ...

... was meant to be used: to give cooler heads a chance to work out disagreement and achieve bipartisanship. It was not meant only to derail the other party.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TomDaisy (Original post)

Wed Jun 2, 2021, 02:00 PM

3. Because it would require a rules change

and we have two Dem Senators who will not vote for ANY changes in the filibuster.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to leftieNanner (Reply #3)

Wed Jun 2, 2021, 02:06 PM

4. Which is dumb because it's not like the rules on it hadn't changed before

So when the claim to be holding on to a “tradition”, they are lying or are clueless

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.history.com/.amp/topics/us-government/history-of-the-filibuster

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread