Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Republicans, why did you NOT USE the Senate Rules?
The Wardesk ^ | 12/19/2009 | Victoria_29

Posted on 12/22/2009 7:55:59 AM PST by BuckeyeTexan

The rules of the Senate require that a quorum be present to transact business. A quorum is 51 Senators. In most instances, outside of roll call votes, there are no more than 4 Senators on the Senate floor. If a Republican Senator suggested the absence of a quorum, Democrats could not transact business on the bill. It is a common courtesy to allow the quorum call to be dispensed with, without requiring 51 members to show up on the Senate floor (to get 51 Senators to appear without a roll call vote is very time consuming). When the Democrats ask unanimous consent that the quorum call be dispensed with, the Republican should immediately shout “I object.”

In 1988, when the Democrats were attempting to pass campaign finance reform, and Republicans refused to help them make a quorum, it took 53 hours for the quorum call to be dispensed with. If at any moment at least 50 Democrats are not on the floor, a Republican Senator could again suggest the absence of a quorum and start the process over again, causing huge delays in the legislative process being able to move forward.

No amendment can automatically or without substantial delay receive a roll call vote without every member of the Senate agreeing. Again, the Senate generally operates on collegial courtesy, but a $2.5 trillion courtesy is too much. Once an amendment is pending, it only takes one Senator to step in front of this freight train. If a Senator objects to ending debate on the amendment or having the amendment set aside, the majority must file cloture on the amendment. First cloture has to ripen and it cannot ripen until the next day’s session of the Senate, so that kills a day of the majority’s time. Assuming 60 Senators vote in favor of ending debate, the Senate is then required to spend 30 hours of its session time before voting on final passage for the amendment. Suffice it to say, if the Republicans had continuously objected from the start, the ten amendments they allowed the majority to process would have taken more days than Harry Reid has on the Senate calendar.

Senators have an obligation to protect the Constitution and the budget and points of order can be raised on both. Many constitutional scholars have pointed out that numerous bill provisions, particularly the individual mandate, are unconstitutional. Under the Senate’s rules, constitutional points of order are debatable. The Republicans should be constantly bringing up constitutional points of order, one after another, on every questionable provision. Reid would presumably be forced to file cloture on the points of order and another three days could be burned up on each one.

The healthcare bill violates § 425(a)(2) of the Budget Act, which prohibits consideration of any legislation that contains an unfunded intergovernmental mandate in excess of $69 million per year. If the point of order is raised and sustained, a simple majority may vote to waive the point of order. But the waiver is debatable and thus would presumably require 60 votes to cloture the motion to waive. This would require them to produce 60 votes at a time when they do not have their deal wrapped up yet, once again burning up three days.

On every vote, including on constantly raised points of order, the Republicans should be objecting that the vote total is incomplete – the Democratic Chair will rule that it is complete and the Republicans then appeal and once again force a vote, delaying the process again and again.

The Republicans should be offering one amendment after another on all of their favorite issues such as guns, abortion, elimination of the death tax, ending the TARP program, and gay marriage in the District of Columbia. Nothing connotes trench warfare like non-germane amendments on hot-button social issues. When you look back at all of the great filibusters of past decades, they almost always involved non-germane, explosive amendments on contentious social and other issues. Republicans should be offering hundreds of such amendments on every topic and using the rules to force votes on every single one. And the Republicans should be forcing the reading of the bill and every single amendment, not consenting to waiving that requirement.

The view coming out of the Senate of the Republicans has the appearance of business-as-usual – colloquies, speeches, and unanimous consent agreements. It does not convey the sense of urgency that should come with an issue of this magnitude and it does not provide any assurance to the public, including most especially the conservative base that is the heart of the Republican Party, that Republican Senators are willing to do everything it takes to stop this bill. If they don’t starting acting forcefully quickly and immediately, not only will they allow the country’s future to be unalterably damaged, they will be hastening the end to their own careers in the elections coming down the road faster than they can imagine.

Finally, I often hear that Senators express frustration when we dare to tell them how to fight, and that their frequent refrain is “you just don’t understand how the Senate works.” Actually some of us understand better than they do how it should work (whether they agree with every particular parliamentary tactic described or not), and the current frustration they feel with us will be nothing like what they may feel if they don’t stop this bill at all costs and act to preserve our Republic.


TOPICS: Government; Politics
KEYWORDS: healthcare; pointoforder; quorum; senate
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-27 last
To: Wissa

“They’re joyful about how it will help their appeals for campaign contributions.”

Yep. that is the perfect truth here: The Republicans are doing nothing but claiming that this means we should give them lots and lots of campaign money to “fight” the Democrats.

This is total bullsh*t.

I will not give the RNC a penny nor vote for a single person who has not voted against this Communist takeover and campaigned HARD against it. So far, that is no one. Screw the RNC.


21 posted on 12/22/2009 9:43:34 AM PST by CodeToad (If it weren't for physics and law enforcement I'd be unstoppable!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: bilhosty

see here for no change part of the bill http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/2413059/posts


22 posted on 12/22/2009 9:43:34 AM PST by Grammy (Politics. .......( poli ) many ( tics ) blood suckers)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Sprite518
[Look folks the Republicans and the Democrats are one in the same. Only vote for conservatives. Forget party.]

------------------

exactly correct....and why they ALL need to be gone!!!....

23 posted on 12/22/2009 10:09:43 AM PST by is_is (VPD of Sgt Dan, Former 2/5 MARINE - "Sleep Well America......Your Marines have your Back")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Grammy

That is a ridicilous add on. You just pass a law repealing it.


24 posted on 12/22/2009 10:50:26 AM PST by bilhosty (Don' t tax people tax newsprint)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Sprite518

If the amnesty bill is going to be the straw that breaks the camel’s back - the bill that will prevent repealing all the other bad stuff and give the commies permanent control of the government (2010 elections a joke) - then this should be the focus of resistance.

Everything that can be done to stop it should be done and then some. This is the one thing that is not reversible. Don’t give up before the fight because for sure there will be no chance to stop it. We should be talking about what can be done now cause that legislation is next on their list. For one thing, rinos up for re-election (e.g. McLame) can be forced to do the right thing if they want to retain their office.

There may be another pressure point. How about enlisting lots of local sheriffs like the one in Arizona (Sheriff Joe Arpaio) to do what he is doing. If a significant number of illegals are deported, they won’t be here to get amnesty. Conservatives could back this effort at the grass roots level in all the states where illegals are most numerous.

Anybody think this is an worthwhile idea? Come on everybody, this is where the line must be drawn and we have the will and the smarts to do it. We can’t just sit back and let it happen.


25 posted on 12/22/2009 10:53:47 AM PST by Natural Born 54
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: ohiogrammy

Take congress off the federal payroll and make their states pay for them.


26 posted on 12/22/2009 11:02:48 AM PST by Eagle Eye (3%)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: BuckeyeTexan

BTTT


27 posted on 12/23/2009 6:01:58 AM PST by antisocial (Texas SCV - Deo Vindice)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-27 last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson