To: brazzaville
The dems changed that rule as well. A few years back they made it so a senator only has to call a filibuster by signing a form or some such. Then they all can leave until the opposition has enough votes to call for cloture (60). They don't actually have to get up before the body of the Senate and speak. Worse, the republicans went along with that change as well.
252 posted on
05/26/2005 5:00:20 PM PDT by
infidel29
("It is only the warlike power of a civilized people that can give peace to the world."- T. Roosevelt)
To: infidel29
Good evening.
"The dems changed that rule as well."
I'm ashamed to say didn't know that. I must really be getting old.
Michael Frazier
283 posted on
05/26/2005 5:17:24 PM PDT by
brazzaville
(No surrender,no retreat. Well, maybe retreat's ok)
To: infidel29
The dems changed that rule as well. A few years back they made it so a senator only has to call a filibuster by signing a form or some such. Then they all can leave until the opposition has enough votes to call for cloture (60). They don't actually have to get up before the body of the Senate and speak. Worse, the republicans went along with that change as well. I'd like to see the Republicans push for a rule change requiring that anyone attempting a filibuster must actually speak. After all, the basis of the filibuster in the first place is that, in the name of "unlimited debate" senators are allowed to hold the floor for as long as they want to talk. The newfangled filibuster goes against tradition and has no justification.
Otherwise, I'd like to see Frist keep nominations at the front of the agenda until they get voted on. As majority leader, I think he should be able to do that.
456 posted on
05/26/2005 7:13:55 PM PDT by
supercat
(Sorry--this tag line is out of order.)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson