57

It is not possible for Democrats to filibuster the nomination under the current Senate rules, due to Mitch McConnell's use of the 'nuclear option' in 2017 which allowed a nomination debate to be ended by a simple majority vote. In 2013, the Senate voted 52-48 to change the number of votes needed for a successful cloture vote (a vote to end a filibuster) on ...


44

In the Senate, there is the so-called "Nuclear Option" that permits the rules of the Senate to be changed with a simple majority. These rules include the 60-vote rule to close debate, which functionally ends a filibuster. In recent memory the Nuclear Option was employed to end filibusters of judicial appointments of the Democrat controlled Senate ...


35

It’s for “procedural reasons to preserve his right to bring the bill up again”. This article from the Washington Post explains why former Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid always seemingly vote against his own party. It's that somebody on the winning side of the cloture vote — in this case, the side voting against cloture — has to file a "motion to ...


27

Assuming that 60 out of 100 senators will never agree on the same thing... That's a huge assumption, which is to say that it is unrealistic. There are lots of things that will not attract the agreement of 60 or more senators, but there are other things that will, such as bills that enable government to function. And there will be things that don't have ...


22

Is there anything stopping an impeachment trial from being filibustered? Yes, there is a specific rule limiting debate time; and, unlike bills, amendments and resolutions, no procedure for amendments or amendments to amendments, and thus no need for a cloture vote to end the debate. It is the cloture vote requiring three-fifths of the Senators to agree that ...


18

Quoth Wikipedia on obstructionism: Another form of parliamentary obstruction practiced in the United States and other countries is called "slow walking". It specifically refers to the extremely slow speed with which legislators walk to the podium to cast their ballots. For example, in Japan this tactic is known as a "cow walk", and in Hawaii it's known as ...


17

The Senate Judiciary Committee is in charge of holding hearings prior to the confirmation of Supreme Court nominees. Since Republicans control the Senate, the 20-member committee would consist of 11 Republicans and 9 Democrats. This means that the Republicans hold a majority in this committee, thus they would have enough votes to grant or withhold consent ...


17

One thing they will be able to do is repeal regulations that have been finalized by the Trump administration in the last few months (many of which were rushed to completion during the lame-duck period). The Biden administration could put out new regulations to repeal the Trump administration's regulations, but they would have to go through the arduous ...


16

What was the one bill that Republicans filibustered in 2020? TL; DR: None. Given the total of 328 and the 327 to 1 distribution in John Roberts' tweet, it appears he was referring to number of cloture votes that were taken in the 116th Congress, which ran from January 3, 2019 through January 3, 2021. During this period 328 cloture motions were filed, 327 of ...


15

Control of the Senate controls the agenda. Examples: Nominations for positions and judges. In controlling the Senate agenda, The Republican majority leader took no action on a Supreme Court nominee by a Democratic president for 11 months. Never got a vote. The same majority leader managed to get a Republican president's nominee through in about 3 weeks. ...


15

If the Democrats get rid of the filibuster to pass voting rights can the next congress repeal these voting rights with a simple majority? The next Congress? Probably not. The next Congress runs from January 2023 to January 2025, during which Biden will still be President. Even assuming the Republicans win both houses of the legislature, they'll need to have ...


14

Even without eliminating the filibuster, quite a lot of legislation can be passed through Reconciliation, which requires only a simple majority (50+VP) to pass. While this is, in theory, only intended for budget items, it has historically been used at other times to pass things that wouldn't normally be considered part of the regular budget, such as the ...


13

The Senate must close the debate in order to proceed. In the original rules, this required a motion called the previous question. In 1805, Aaron Burr argued that this was unnecessary and the rules were changed such that it required unanimous consent that debate was over and they were ready to vote. Until 1837, they never denied consent. From 1837 to ...


12

The tie-breaking vote that the VP has in the US Senate is set in the Constitution. The filibuster is set out in the rules of the Senate. If the Senate decides to remove the ability to filibuster, it has no impact on the VP having a tie-breaking vote.


10

There are several reasons for this. Nuclear Option Basically, there is nothing stopping the Republican party from removing the 60 vote cloture and then passing everything with the 52 person majority they have. That's not a perfect solution - it would only take 2 dissenters for them to lose a vote but for issues the GOP is united on, it would work fine. ...


10

You didn't clarify as to whether you meant "break" in the sense of "This rule expressly prohibits this, but we did it anyway" or in the sense of "This rule is still on the books, but it no longer has any meaning". For clarity's sake, I will refer to the first as violating the rule and the second is invalidating the rule. The senate didn't violate its own ...


10

The issue under discussion is the Organizing Resolution, which details the rules, membership, and budgets of committees, among other things. The Organizing Resolution is a "simple resolution" which technically requires only a bare majority to pass, which the Democrats possess thanks to the Vice President's tie-breaking vote. The reason Senator ...


9

Not 100% sure, but I think the rules are that Senators are not allowed to give [unlimited] floor speeches during the trial. They can mainly pass written messages. Senators will only have the opportunity for limited speech at the trial. Members should refrain from speaking to neighboring senators while the case is being presented. Pages will continue to be ...


8

Actually, upon further research, it seems that a supermajority requirement to pass legislation was discussed and dismissed in several of the Federalist Papers. In FEDERALIST NO. 22, Alexander Hamilton argues that such supermajority requirements were one of the flaws in the Articles of Confederation, and that they are "a poison" to democracy: This ...


7

Yes, Democrats used the filibuster to kill the late-term abortion ban bill in 2018. It had passed the House, had the support of the majority of the Senate, and would’ve been signed by President Trump. The bill, which was passed by the House of Representatives in Oct. 2017, is opposed by most Senate Democrats. To prevent a filibuster, Republicans needed ...


6

The rule isn't that spending bills can pass with a simple majority. The rule is that up to two bills a year can be passed via budget reconciliation. This is limited to one spending bill and one revenue bill or to one bill regarding both spending and revenue. This tax reform was their one revenue bill this year. They could still do one spending bill. ...


6

Actually, the original purpose of a filibuster is to prevent a vote on the bill. At some times, a group would get together and pass the speaker's role to each other, to allow some rest.. Other times an individual will speak for as long as he can before giving up. filibuster U.S. Politics. the use of irregular or obstructive tactics by a member of a ...


6

The purpose of the filibuster is not to force everyone to listen to you read the phone book - it's to delay the matter before the Senate. So it would still be "effective" if everyone left, because if they aren't there, they obviously aren't voting on whatever it is you didn't want them to vote on. According to Article I, Section 5 of the Constitution: a ...


6

Yes, but As a general rule, Senators can walk out during almost anything. They are only forced to stay by their own conscience and how it might look to voters if they left. It's also worth noting that they have changed filibusters from requiring a Senator to give a speech to a simple vote to close debate. While Ted Cruz did give a speech for many ...


6

Yes, they can because that is how congress works, any bill passed by a simple majority can be repealed by a simple majority. All bills can be passed with a simple majority, the filibuster has nothing to do with passing a bill. It is just a procedure that is designed to hold up the vote on a bill by using debate. The problem is with the modern filibuster ...


5

Elizabeth Warren was accused of being violating Senate Rule XIX. No Senator in debate shall, directly or indirectly, by any form of words impute to another Senator or to other Senators any conduct or motive unworthy or unbecoming a Senator. This was what she said that was in violation and she was warned by the Senate's presiding officer, Steve ...


5

In October of 2011, Harry Reid trigger the Nuclear Option. In short, he was able to push through the confirmation of a number of federal judges with a simple majority without threat of filibuster. No vote for cloture was required. While the scope of the Nuclear Option was relatively limited (only federal judge appointments I believe), there is nothing ...


5

Perhaps someday it will be, but this is called the "nuclear option" for good reason. Each party has used the filibuster to prevent legislation, or at least force amendments to legislation that they don't like. If Democrats had got rid of the filibuster under Obama, they would not have been able to block Trump's Wall and other projects. If ...


5

What made the nuclear option this time around so tenable, as [o]pposed to say 2005? It appears to have been a combination of frustration and desperation. A PolitiFact article, November 22, 2013, that discusses Sen. Reid's "flip-flop" on the "nuclear option". [While only excepts are provided, reading the full article is suggested.] We’ll ...


Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible