General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsWA-03 Democrat
(3,058 posts)and ask forgiveness if the country survives. Or not
MontanaMama
(23,367 posts)Serious question.
FBaggins
(26,789 posts)The "nuclear" option allows Schumer to create a "carveout" that says that the filibuster rule does not apply to voting rights legislation (or even all legislation), but it does not allow for the creation of an entirely new rule.
Doing that requires a supermajority. That isn't technically a "filibuster" if the minority wants to block the rule. But the effect is the same.
Fiendish Thingy
(15,707 posts)https://washingtonmonthly.com/2022/01/14/chuck-schumers-last-chance-on-voting-rights/
He can force a talking filibuster, and force the GOP to keep all 50 senators on the floor constantly. If more than 4 Republicans leave the floor, Schumer can call for a cloture vote, and Manchin and Sinema cant stop it. Then they move to an up/down vote on the bills. No nuclear option, no rule change.
Under Rule XIX, each senator can only speak twice, and, if all 50 Dem senators and VP stay on the floor, they can defeat any proposed amendments (which restart the two times clock). Once all 50 Republicans have had their turn, debate ends without a cloture vote.
It could take weeks, even a month or more, but it could work.
nolabear
(42,002 posts)Yeah, weeks. But its a power move and we need to show them power. Its all they understand.
thatdemguy
(453 posts)It would require all 50 D senators to be there as well. If the pubs started talking and the Democrats left in the middle of the night the pubs could call for a vote and vote it down. It would require serious commitment from both sides either way. The odds of 4 pubs leaving and having every Dem there would be slim. They would all be sleeping in their offices waiting for a vote, would not happen.
Fiendish Thingy
(15,707 posts)A recess keeps the filibuster debate intact as being on the same legislative day.
FBaggins
(26,789 posts)An adjournment resets the clock.
And, of course, that means that Manchin has to participate.
Fiendish Thingy
(15,707 posts)The question of Manchins participation may be why Schumer has announced he will force a vote on the rule change rather than force a talking filibuster, at least for now.
FBaggins
(26,789 posts)Schumer cant turn an adjournment into a recess by fiat.
FBaggins
(26,789 posts)The problem is that even a month or more is unlikely to work and nothing else gets done during that time.
Upset that Cruz is slowing down nomination votes? Just wait until all senate business is blocked. McConnells threat to gum up the works is no longer a threat
were doing it to ourselves.
And if there is ANY time during those weeks/months that they have more members available than we do
a motion to adjourn is always in order and cannot be debated. The entire effort is wasted and we have to start over. Or they actually propose an amendment that one Democrat cant bring themselves to vote against.
totodeinhere
(13,059 posts)filibuster. I don't know about Sinema.
PortTack
(32,821 posts)working for voters and democracy!!
Hoyt
(54,770 posts)elleng
(131,372 posts)MichMan
(12,002 posts)LiberatedUSA
(1,666 posts)
then back to the end of the line. There is enough R Senators, that ones shift will have a long enough break to not disrupt ones life too much. I bet they could keep it up for a very long time. Do your shift then you are done for a few weeks, then back again.
If push comes to shove, they could do it.
mcar
(42,467 posts)read post 7.
LiberatedUSA
(1,666 posts)They covered their bases. We will see what happens.
mcar
(42,467 posts)mcar
(42,467 posts)This ain't over.
FBaggins
(26,789 posts)So its no different than his support for the voting rights legislation- but without being willing to go nuclear to get there
budkin
(6,727 posts)LFG!!!
budkin
(6,727 posts)manicdem
(397 posts)I see unforseen problems with requiring a talking filibuster.
Republicans can keep this going on for months which essentially blocks all other legislation in the meantime. If a SCOTUS judge dies or retires, we can't confirm them. Any essential bills, like funding or requirements, would not be passed and Dems would be blamed for it. And should the Repubs somehow gain the house, senate, and presidency in 2024 they will use this against us to pass their bills.
And are we sure we have the 51 votes needed to pass the voting bill?
TheFarseer
(9,328 posts)Thats what it should be. You shouldnt be able to just say youre filibustering - you should have to actually do it. If you believe in your position so much, get up in front of everyone and explain why youre right for about 60 hours.