[mrsmith]

It takes 2/3 of the Senators present to break a filibuster of a rules change, not 60.

Standing rules of the Senate
Chapter 22: Precedence of Motions
""Is it the sense of the Senate that the debate shall be brought to a close?" And if that question shall be decided in the affirmative by three-fifths of the Senators duly chosen and sworn -- except on a measure or motion to amend the Senate rules, in which case the necessary affirmative vote shall be two-thirds of the Senators present and voting -- then said measure, motion, or other matter pending before the Senate, or the unfinished business, shall be the unfinished business to the exclusion of all other business until disposed of. "

I know the Senate rules are mind-numbingly complicated, but come on!

Legislation: 3/5 of those sworn (60) to end debate (break a filibuster).
Rules change: 2/3 of those present and voting to end debate (break a filibuster).

This doesn't apply to a ruling from the chair that judicial filibusters are Constitutionally out of order.

[BreitbartSentMe]

But the key is two-thirds of the senators PRESENT AND VOTING, not just elected!! Here comes the 24/7 fillibuser we've been waiting for.

[jackbill]

I know the Senate rules are mind-numbingly complicated, but come on!

All that I can do is report, you can decide.

The Senate, in 1975, changed the rules on the number of votes needed for cloture and they did it, after a number of parliamentary maneuvers, on a simple majority vote.

This was mentioned in a column in the Washington Times on May 14, 2003 by Charles Hurt.

Check it out at:

http://www.freerepublic.com/perl/post?id=934702%2C134

[jackbill]

I don't know what happened to the link, but somehow I screwed up. Try this one. If it doesn't work, I'll copy and post the article. Let me know.

http://washingtontimes.com/national/20030513-104057-4994r.htm

The author doesn't explain the "parliamentarian procedures" but he is adamant that the total effort took only a simple majority.

[ImphClinton]

bttt