2016 Postmortem

merrily

(45,251 posts)

144. 50+1 is still a majority. The "super majority" is needed only to end a filibuster.

Sat Feb 27, 2016, 05:53 PM

Feb 2016

It started in 1917, with a 2/3 requirement, but there were fewer states then. They lowered the requirement to 3/5 in the 1970s.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cloture#United_States

Filibuster of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 went on for, IIRC, 83 calendar days.

Off the top of my head, I can think of two reasons the super majority is needed more often now:

1. There seems to be less regard for the country and more for playing to the base.

2. There is no more requirement that Senators actually stand there and yammer. They just have to basically give notice of a filibuster and they're done. (Heaven forbid we demand that a Senator get tired while screwing up the country.)

More at the link above and at http://www.thenation.com/article/filibuster-faq-fact-fiction-and-why-we-need-reform/

BTW, karynnj has a very good grasp of Senate rules, as I recall.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

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

152 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Sanders Will Need 60 Votes To Pass Anything. But Hillary Clinton Will ONLY NEED 60. [View all] Segami Feb 2016 OP

That really did UglyGreed Feb 2016 #1

giggle oldandhappy Feb 2016 #2

Hillary can "triangulate" at least 10 votes, right? seaotter Feb 2016 #3

yes because Republican always want to work WITH her... Ferd Berfel Feb 2016 #71

Why wouldn't they? She called them the enemy of which she is most proud. merrily Feb 2016 #87

Benghazi was a shit show but her carrying of herself was unprofessional. Juicy_Bellows Feb 2016 #99

I watched for about two hours. She was that way the entire time I watched. Her merrily Feb 2016 #102

Well said, and you would probably be cited for contempt. Juicy_Bellows Feb 2016 #103

They're obviously proud she was disrespectful. Yet they will post she will get merrily Feb 2016 #104

If elected, the things she'll get done is what I worry about. Juicy_Bellows Feb 2016 #107

The only things she will get done are the things Republicans want done anyway--and merrily Feb 2016 #108

Correct - Beat me to it. Ferd Berfel Feb 2016 #118

Of Course she will get more done than Bernie. HE has to get 60 of them to come alone Ferd Berfel Feb 2016 #116

100 Percent Bernie supporter here in defense of Hillary. Gary 50 Feb 2016 #123

Things that will thrill Republicans and make our side cringe. questionseverything Feb 2016 #127

Whom you support does not affect the accuracy of your answer. merrily Feb 2016 #131

Thanks for the lecture. If I feel like stating I support Bernie before I defend Clinton it has Gary 50 Feb 2016 #150

that middle video with the smirk greymouse Feb 2016 #128

Good point, sea otter. Nitram Feb 2016 #121

They will , of course, extend that same good will to Hillary. seaotter Feb 2016 #122

Not if she breaks the Bernie supporter rule and compromises with a few Republicans to win a vote. Nitram Feb 2016 #126

Obama has been more than open to compromise , what makes you.. seaotter Feb 2016 #130

I was responding to a post that suggested that Clinton might reach an agreement but would... Nitram Feb 2016 #133

Deflect much? seaotter Feb 2016 #134

I'm deflecting because I responded to one post and now you want me to respond to a different one? Nitram Feb 2016 #138

Willing, yes. But able? I don't think so. seaotter Feb 2016 #135

That's true. You don't "think" so. nt Nitram Feb 2016 #139

There is certainly no reason one should " think so" seaotter Feb 2016 #140

This message was self-deleted by its author madokie Feb 2016 #4

change it, before it's flagged. I wouldn't flag it but as we've found there are people here trillion Feb 2016 #88

Tweety last night while interrogating Bernie UglyGreed Feb 2016 #5

And AFTER interrogating Sanders... cui bono Feb 2016 #22

Sanders declares Victory!!! cui bono Feb 2016 #23

Thats great.....hopefully Segami Feb 2016 #28

ROFL.... Segami Feb 2016 #24

Did you see the victory one? cui bono Feb 2016 #26

Wonderful UglyGreed Feb 2016 #39

Anytime the majority wants to they can end the need for 60 votes. n/r PoliticAverse Feb 2016 #6

Yes - that artificial roadblock is just there to provide cover for do-nothing politicians Maedhros Feb 2016 #20

+100gabillion%. GoneFishin Feb 2016 #82

There is a theory that it can be done only at the start of a new session or some such. merrily Feb 2016 #97

I used to believe the "only at beginning" theory then Harry Reid used the threat... PoliticAverse Feb 2016 #98

Maybe not. I don't recall all the details of that change. merrily Feb 2016 #145

Harry Reid was afraid to change it but I am not sure. We jwirr Feb 2016 #142

50+1 is still a majority. The "super majority" is needed only to end a filibuster. merrily Feb 2016 #144

Thank you. Old enough to remember a few real filibusters. jwirr Feb 2016 #146

Again, Bernie did it! I think it was 8 hours. He published it as a book. merrily Feb 2016 #147

I watched him and was so proud of him. jwirr Feb 2016 #148

Harry Reid was afraid to change it but I am not sure. We jwirr Feb 2016 #142

Well to be fair Hillary will get the 60 votes. Cassiopeia Feb 2016 #7

Yep. Absolutely right. lostnfound Feb 2016 #16

+1 datguy_6 Feb 2016 #17

Blammo. hifiguy Feb 2016 #51

Because she's 'pragmatic' DiehardLiberal Feb 2016 #61

+10000 trillion Feb 2016 #90

This is not accurate. 60 votes are needed to overcome a filibuster, passing is done with a simple Agnosticsherbet Feb 2016 #8

Technically you need 60 to end the debate (cloture) in order to vote on passage datguy_6 Feb 2016 #19

Thanks, that puts it all together. Agnosticsherbet Feb 2016 #21

Of course I recall the last time we had 60 votes in the Senate DefenseLawyer Feb 2016 #9

Hey, c'mon. Kall Feb 2016 #14

This message was self-deleted by its author olddots Feb 2016 #10

I can't believe the logic or lack of such that some have that argue that Clinton will be able rhett o rick Feb 2016 #11

Except as we have seen with Obama, if you offer them their own policy they STILL won't pass it. cui bono Feb 2016 #13

Detriment is putting it mildly.... Segami Feb 2016 #15

!!! cui bono Feb 2016 #12

Hillary is anathema to the GOP FangedNoumenom Feb 2016 #18

Kicked and recommended. Uncle Joe Feb 2016 #25

Sanders, being quite unpopular in the Senate, would have a harder time getting 60 wyldwolf Feb 2016 #27

What is this? Mean Girl Friday? Matariki Feb 2016 #33

what part am I making up? wyldwolf Feb 2016 #35

Which part aren't you making up? Matariki Feb 2016 #42

Every Democrat you listed has endorsed Hillary wyldwolf Feb 2016 #46

So what? I'm sure they need to stay on the right side of DWS Matariki Feb 2016 #50

So, automatically if a Dem endorses HRC Kelvin Mace Feb 2016 #56

Stay on topic. You said he was "quite unpopular in the Senate". cui bono Feb 2016 #94

I would guess he would have trouble getting the same votes HRC would Kelvin Mace Feb 2016 #34

doubtful wyldwolf Feb 2016 #36

So, those "moderates", like HRC herself, Kelvin Mace Feb 2016 #38

Yeah. I didn't think you'd get an answer on that one. MelissaB Feb 2016 #49

no, they'd side with Hillary wyldwolf Feb 2016 #60

Ummm, no Kelvin Mace Feb 2016 #73

Ummm, yes wyldwolf Feb 2016 #74

Dem sentaors would or would not vote for Sanders proposals? Kelvin Mace Feb 2016 #76

Not red state ones wyldwolf Feb 2016 #77

So, they Dems would side with the GOP Kelvin Mace Feb 2016 #79

some almost did during the ACA. So, yeah. And glad you got it. wyldwolf Feb 2016 #81

So moderates will betray you. Kelvin Mace Feb 2016 #91

Sanders will tell them to "cut it out" and they will "fall in line" SoLeftIAmRight Feb 2016 #112

Have a lot of the GOPuke majority endorsed HRC? I hadn't noticed. mikehiggins Feb 2016 #37

Exactly wyldwolf Feb 2016 #40

Hillary's compromise only means seeing this dick again.... Segami Feb 2016 #45

Bernie's non-compromise only means seeing this legislatively wyldwolf Feb 2016 #57

And everybody just loooooves Hillary. jillan Feb 2016 #55

they polled Senators? wyldwolf Feb 2016 #58

I count 40 lumberjack_jeff Feb 2016 #141

Sanders has gotten 60 votes in the Senate before. Has Hillary? Loudestlib Feb 2016 #63

Are you saying Democrats won't vote for Sander's programs. Tierra_y_Libertad Feb 2016 #124

So, you're telling me Democrats will roll against Sanders because he's Sanders? AtheistCrusader Feb 2016 #132

Very Funny Post noretreatnosurrender Feb 2016 #29

Yay numbers! Fairgo Feb 2016 #30

LOL! Matariki Feb 2016 #31

Could Matthews possibly monicaangela Feb 2016 #32

It was very funny..ha ha. Bobblehead political commentators. n/t Jefferson23 Feb 2016 #41

Love it! Karma13612 Feb 2016 #43

Plus her health insurance plans hinge on cooperation from repuke state governors. libtodeath Feb 2016 #44

So the issue favors neither side treestar Feb 2016 #47

Doublethink, doublespeak, Newspeak. hifiguy Feb 2016 #48

Well, she already has 39 to his 0. Amimnoch Feb 2016 #52

I hope people are looking at down ticket candidates like senators and congresspersons. Chicago1980 Feb 2016 #53

It's tough. They hate her yet share her values. They like Bernie but senz Feb 2016 #54

When Obama Had A Filibuster Proof Congress.... Billsmile Feb 2016 #59

Except the 3rd way types were there to stop him. Jester Messiah Feb 2016 #65

Correct! Billsmile Feb 2016 #67

K&R Mbrow Feb 2016 #62

Tweety. Enthusiast Feb 2016 #64

Very funny! zentrum Feb 2016 #66

60 will be much easier than 60 lobodons Feb 2016 #68

The real issue is cabinet and regulatory agency appointments. Carlo Marx Feb 2016 #69

I refuse to watch Chris Matthews. erlewyne Feb 2016 #70

I stopped watching Jenny_92808 Feb 2016 #93

Yep.60 is a much tougher threshold than 60. NRaleighLiberal Feb 2016 #72

or the tingles up his leg. 840high Feb 2016 #78

Since 60>60, that makes perfect sense nikto Feb 2016 #75

There's a mass delusion that Hillary will wave a magic wand and all the people who have made Obama's Vinca Feb 2016 #80

Chris Mathews is merely speaking the unvarnished truth. Trust Buster Feb 2016 #83

Read the OP again. You clearly missed the point. merrily Feb 2016 #85

I missed nothing, Mathews confronted Sanders with the reality of an historicallypolarized Congress. Trust Buster Feb 2016 #86

Matthews was as disingenuous as some DUers, pretending it will be any easier for Hillary to get her merrily Feb 2016 #89

We must have a different definition of the word "dishonesty". Trust Buster Feb 2016 #92

No dishonesty on Sanders part: he says over and over that he cannot do it alone. merrily Feb 2016 #95

College students hear only that which they choose to hear. Trust Buster Feb 2016 #96

Which college do you go to? merrily Feb 2016 #100

College is a couple decades in my rear view mirror. Trust Buster Feb 2016 #105

I guess you can only keep repeating the same things I've answered thrice already. nt merrily Feb 2016 #106

I shared my position with you. I have nothing else to add. Trust Buster Feb 2016 #109

Given that we used to have free tuition, obviously that could never ever happen again eridani Feb 2016 #113

Because Sanders has fewer TIES to CONGRESS. randome Feb 2016 #84

Heh... Blue_In_AK Feb 2016 #101

Reminds me of CNN in 2000. moondust Feb 2016 #110

What I found disturbing was Sanders' response. Beacool Feb 2016 #111

No we can't! No we can't! No we can't! eridani Feb 2016 #114

It may not be inspiring, but it's reality. Beacool Feb 2016 #119

Since Clinton doesn't even have the rally attendance-- eridani Mar 2016 #152

Hillary's gonna get the good stuff passed, like, uh, flag burning legislation Warren DeMontague Feb 2016 #115

Impeachment votes will be the new Obamacare. Spitfire of ATJ Feb 2016 #117

Now, that is not only logical but also funny as hell MichaelSoE Feb 2016 #120

I saw this too, and smelled the oily fumes of corporate media from it. nightscanner59 Feb 2016 #125

There is a difference between those 60 votes. LiberalFighter Feb 2016 #129

There you go getting things confused again! kristopher Feb 2016 #136

LOL. K and R. nt Smarmie Doofus Feb 2016 #137

I noticed that yawning logic hole as well. DirkGently Feb 2016 #149

Yes, but Hillary has electrolytes. She has what plants crave. valerief Feb 2016 #151