How long can one Senator possibly filibuster?

[Uncle Joe]

How can one Senator physically outstrip the endurance of 50+ Senators?

It seems to me the filibuster is nothing but a fig leaf used to protect a dysfunctional, ineffective, immoral, private, for profit "health" coverage system which has no logical basis for being except to funnel profits to their own bloated bureaucracy, the corporate media via commercials and advertising or back to the same group of politicians; willingly emasculated by less than 1/50th of their own.

Comcast listed the "Winners and Losers" on their web-page of this bill to date and their take on it is an obvious slanted joke, no mention of the American People as a whole, the for profit "health" insurance industry or the corporate media's guaranteed revenue stream. It was just the usual game of micro dividing the people's best interests in order to conquer them.

[no limit]

1. What did you think of the fillibuster when Bush was trying to privatize social security?

[Uncle Joe]

4. On the issue of privatizing social security; I was against it and I was happy the threat of

filibuster prevented it from happening, however that was a singular issue; which only came in to consideration via the most diabolical of means, the illegitimate coup/selection enabling of Bush to power and I consider that to be more an exception than the norm.

While the current system of a 60/40 filibuster may work in preventing bad policy from taking place, there is a major trade-off; that being national rigidity and this is most dangerous considering the times and issues facing humanity.

I fear the U.S. is falling in to the standard empire model of succumbing to riga mortise regardless of logic, common sense, and overwhelming scientific evidence to avoid that fate.

It could be going to a system of 55/45 filibuster would still allow some protection against majority misrule without trashing our nation's ability to evolve and keep up with the times in a rapidly changing world.

Not all change is positive but I believe staying fixed in our ways will insure our demise.

[HopeHoops]

2. 24 hours and 18 minutes. Strom Thurmond, 1957.

http://www.senate.gov/artandhistory/history/minute/Wayne_Morse_Sets_Filibuster_Record.htm

"Against this backdrop, Wayne Morse rose on the Senate floor on April 24, 1953. Described as "a lean trim man, with a clipped mustache, sharp nose, and bushy black eyebrows," he began a filibuster against Tidelands Oil legislation. When he concluded after 22 hours and 26 minutes, he had broken the 18-hour record set in 1908 by his mentor, Robert La Follette. Morse kept that distinction until 1957, when Strom Thurmond logged the current record of 24 hours and 18 minutes."

[Kitsune]

3. They don't have to actually do any filibustering anymore. The process has been changed.

Now it only holds up the one bill, not the entire Senate, and nobody has to actually talk, only note the absence of a quorum every so often. Gone are the true filibusters like we saw in Mr. Smith Goes to Washingon, and I think we really are much worse off as a country because of it.

[AlinPA]

5. Now, the "filibuster" is made manifest by the cloture vote. Without 60 votes, the bill is dead.

Nobody has to say anything. Nobody has to go to the floor and talk.

[Uncle Joe]

7. Which seems to me as being totally anathema to what the Senate likes to project themselves as being

"The World's Most Deliberative Body" it would be funny if it weren't so tragic.

How can anyone deliberate if no one is talking about the issue: the pros, cons, benefits and consequences? It's more like we need to keep Senator X happy or he/she will take their ball home and we can't play.

[dionysus]

6. it doesnt work like it does in the movies you know.

[Uncle Joe]

9. Yes and I believe that's a major part of the dysfunction as I alluded to on post #7.

The question I have is, Why would "The World's Most Deliberative Body" make it so easy not to deliberate?

[ThomWV]

8. As long as he can get 40 others to go along with him

Because the moment one of them collapses from exhaustion the opposition will call for a cloture vote and that will be the end of it.

[Uncle Joe]

11. It seems to me if his/her argument has merit, forty Senators could easily

share shifts preventing one from passing out due to exhaustion.

People making minimum wage stand and talk for much longer periods of time than these well paid Senators would need to.

If the argument can't get 40 Senators to take shifts, I would contend either the merit behind said argument is lacking or the merit within the Senators is hollow and if the latter is the case, elections should remedy the malady.

I also believe allowing them to hide in the dark without addressing the issues in a forceful manner only perpetuates the problem as it keeps the public in a more ignorant state of mind.

[slackmaster]

10. The record is 24 hours, 18 minutes by Strom Thurmond

Against the Civil Rights Act of 1957.