Posted on 12/21/2018 8:49:44 PM PST by conservative98
Here’s how it works.
Senators don’t need unanimous consent to bring up a bill. The lack of unanimous consent or 60 votes doesn’t table a bill. It’s just that opposing senators in the minority can request to be recognized and continuously hold the floor. In recent years, majority parties have never made the minority do that. Sometimes it makes sense to pre-emptively achieve an agreement because the majority just can’t afford to chew up endless days on debate of a single issue. But sometimes there are issues worth fighting for. Either way, this is the end of the line for the 115th Congress.
How do you get Democrats to stop talking? This is where Senate Rule XIX, “the two-speech rule,” comes into play. The rule explicitly prohibits individual senators from speaking “more than twice upon any one question in debate on the same legislative day.” Given that Republicans preside over the chair and control the floor, they can refuse to officially adjourn, opting only to recess temporarily, and keep the Senate in the same legislative day indefinitely. This will ensure that even the Democrats who are willing and able to speak for a long time will eventually be forced to relent.
(Excerpt) Read more at conservativereview.com ...
I don’t see why they don’t just start twisting Hatch and Kyl’s arms (literally if necessary) until they agree to the nuclear option. The excuse that “then the democrats might do it” doesn’t hold water because the last time they held the senate THEY ALREADY DID IT to pass goddamn Obamacare! They’re going to do it whether we do it or not, you Turtle!
It’s my understanding that the Constutution calls for a simple majority therefore these supermajority rules are unconstitutional and should be called out as being so.
Profiles in courage!
So is Jeff Sessions
We have a uniparty that doesnt want to pass useful bills.
Repub Senate leadership is part of the uniparty.
I agree and dont trust him.He is too sqweeky clean or made to look that way.
[VP Pence could replace Mitch & get bill on the floor]
I like it
Because McConnell isn’t pushing anyone vote for it. If he was vigorously pushing and demanding people vote for this budget he could get to 51. McConnell can enjoy his very long shutdown and maybe he will learn.
Republicans simply don’t have enough votes, and there is little or no way to twist the arms of retiring senators, like Flake.
turned on Fox for a few minutes. Shannn Bream let a Dem woman go on and on and on and on.
then Bream quoted some Dem insulting the President as a “toddler” over the wall.
two short statements from some GOP guy and Chaffetz in support of the wall.
immediately Bream says statement has just come in from the Dems - Schumer and Pelosi.
turned it off. it was all Dems this and Dems that.
Of course they can pass it. But they won’t . They’ll just keep screwing around with it — and USA -and us, the poor miserable “citizens” that are forced to pay for all this backstabbing and buffoonery
Good point.
McConnell has done a stellar job on Trump’s judges, but the uniparty definitely does not want the wall.
If this does not pass in the Senate it is all on Mitch Bitch McConnell. Harry Reid used the nuclear option on appointing judges. Mitch Bitch should do the same. If this does not happen Mitch Bitch has just destroyed the Republican Party and conservationism.
Forgot to add this. If Mitch goes nuclear he should applaud Harry Reid about his wisdom of doing the same in the past.
I know. I just turned on Fox and there was a breaking news bit. A small soundbite from Mitch. And then Chuck go on for a a good amount of time about Trump and “temper tantrum.” Fox. Unfair and unbalanced.
I think with all of Trump-plans...there are secondary targets, and I think putting Mitch into the corner and admitting that he’s worthless might be a possibility as well.
Mark Levin read this last evening on his show. Democrats would not hesitate to invoke this rule if it meant they could win. God help us if Schumer becomes senate leader.
Coverage on Levin important. If this doesn’t get to a vote and there is a “shutdown” this is what should be brought up
What does bother me is there will never be any recall or mention when previous government shut downs comparison impacts get reviewed over the impact they had. Of this;
Not dare refer to the most costly and disgraceful results from a “shutdown” that happened during Nixon’s presidency. Caused by the democrats refusal to stand by the Vietnamese effort to remain independent by refusing them air support and supplemental funding of arm supplies which would have prevented that loss and that humiliating disgraceful evacuation of our Saigon embassy.
Which quickly then resulted in a multitude of Vietnamese being slaughtered and the sacrifices of thousands of our armed forces paying with their lives assisting them in their fight for freedom disgraced.
While there might be a parallel drawn to the recent decision to pull our troops out of the nation building quagmire known as Syria. Those media resources doing so will be the same ones who supported the ignominious Vietnamese abandonment using the same hue and cry of no nation building (Which we were not doing. We were asked to help. Although JFK expanded it into that by the removal of President Diem.
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.