[Cboldt]

-- Technically Reid would need 60 or 2/3rds to change that rule as I recall. --

Two thirds of those present and voting. The "60" is three fifths of members sworn, and is a fixed number.

There is a good argument that a simple majority can change the rules, at the beginning of a session. The nuclear option that was bandied about in 2006 was a parliamentary move, other than at the start of a session.

It's funny how the headline is phrase in terms of limiting GOP obstruction. Am I to take it that DEM obstruction is to continue unimpeded?

Anyway, the Senate is an utterly dysfunctional legislative body.

[sickoflibs]

RE :”Two thirds of those present and voting. The “60” is three fifths of members sworn, and is a fixed number.
There is a good argument that a simple majority can change the rules, at the beginning of a session. The nuclear option that was bandied about in 2006 was a parliamentary move, other than at the start of a session.”

Thanks, I couldnt remember which it was and was too lazy to look it up.

The contrary argument I heard is that the Senate never starts a 'session' because the terms are overlapping 6 years, versus the House where the terms are 2 years and everyone has faced the election.

In any case changing this rule is shortsighted for either party. Dems used it all the time against Bush.

[ding_dong_daddy_from_dumas]

See post #24.

[ding_dong_daddy_from_dumas]

See post #24.