Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
48 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
A filibustering senator cannot sit down (Original Post) charlyvi Jun 2016 OP
Can he sit while a colleague is "asking a question"? brooklynite Jun 2016 #1
No charlyvi Jun 2016 #5
Kick Quackers Jun 2016 #2
I thought everybody here was against filibusters Travis_0004 Jun 2016 #3
Republicans are in power oberliner Jun 2016 #8
We are against virtual filibusters. charlyvi Jun 2016 #9
+1 dchill Jun 2016 #42
Actual filibusters are fine. Iggo Jun 2016 #13
And unlike the virtual kind almost always fail. n/t PoliticAverse Jun 2016 #14
I like that they're trying, rather than babylonsister Jun 2016 #37
But if they want to actually block the legislation they're filibustering they can just do so. PoliticAverse Jun 2016 #38
We get it. You're a gunner. HERVEPA Jun 2016 #30
You beat me to it. Gun huggers are so easy to spot these days Feeling the Bern Jun 2016 #47
If they are going to stand and actually filibuster, no problem. AllyCat Jun 2016 #31
few oppose all filibusters. Most oppose the ABUSE of the filibuster. NYC Liberal Jun 2016 #34
I thought senators didn't even have to speak for a filibuster. They just needed 60 votes valerief Jun 2016 #4
That's how the Dems give republicans permission to fillibuster. arcane1 Jun 2016 #7
So Murphy can sit down? Pee? nt valerief Jun 2016 #18
No charlyvi Jun 2016 #27
How come GOP senators who filibuster don't even hate to talk and Murphy can't even sit? nt valerief Jun 2016 #28
Because if one party has 60 votes charlyvi Jun 2016 #32
Yeah, I remember Bernie's 8.5 hour filibuster on the Bush tax cuts in 2010. valerief Jun 2016 #35
They do need 60 votes. joshcryer Jun 2016 #48
It's a waste of time davidn3600 Jun 2016 #6
Probably charlyvi Jun 2016 #11
It isn't. But feel free to take your support to the naysayers. AllyCat Jun 2016 #33
Publicity stunt. n/t Kang Colby Jun 2016 #10
That is an EXTREMELY ableist rule. Adrahil Jun 2016 #12
Most likely you would not filibuster yeoman6987 Jun 2016 #15
That's not acceptable, IMO. NT Adrahil Jun 2016 #19
Maybe not but that's the rules. yeoman6987 Jun 2016 #24
No, it's not... Chan790 Jun 2016 #43
agreed. nt Maru Kitteh Jun 2016 #16
Indeed. n/t PoliticAverse Jun 2016 #17
Either Kerrey or Cleland asked for a ruling at one point Recursion Jun 2016 #21
OK I tried to find an answer to this but couldn't charlyvi Jun 2016 #23
I would hope some accommodation could be found. NT Adrahil Jun 2016 #26
Except SwankyXomb Jun 2016 #36
Does the ADA apply to the Senate? Mariana Jun 2016 #40
From... PoliticAverse Jun 2016 #46
Wendy Davis is my Hero. sheshe2 Jun 2016 #20
This message was self-deleted by its author k8conant Jun 2016 #22
The Republicans do not want a vote on gun control, it will point out their inability to dodge doing Thinkingabout Jun 2016 #25
Bernie filibustered for 8 hours over the sequester agreement Arazi Jun 2016 #29
That didn't count because Hillary supporters hate Bernie Doctor_J Jun 2016 #41
Sounds like the Senate needs an ADA compliance inspection Bucky Jun 2016 #39
Congress exampted itself from the ADA. Chan790 Jun 2016 #44
Murphy's my guy. Glad I can vote for a great man. lindysalsagal Jun 2016 #45

charlyvi

(6,537 posts)
9. We are against virtual filibusters.
Wed Jun 15, 2016, 10:22 PM
Jun 2016

Senator Murphy is doing an actual Jimmy Stewart Mr Smith Goes to Washington filibuster. It is magnificent.

PoliticAverse

(26,366 posts)
38. But if they want to actually block the legislation they're filibustering they can just do so.
Wed Jun 15, 2016, 11:28 PM
Jun 2016

Republicans don't have a filibuster-proof majority in the Senate.

They wouldn't fail they'd succeed by just one of the Senators placing a block on the legislation.

AllyCat

(16,174 posts)
31. If they are going to stand and actually filibuster, no problem.
Wed Jun 15, 2016, 11:03 PM
Jun 2016

It's the "feet up on my desk, phone-in filibuster" that people don't like.

NYC Liberal

(20,135 posts)
34. few oppose all filibusters. Most oppose the ABUSE of the filibuster.
Wed Jun 15, 2016, 11:08 PM
Jun 2016

That is what Republicans have done in unprecedented numbers.

valerief

(53,235 posts)
4. I thought senators didn't even have to speak for a filibuster. They just needed 60 votes
Wed Jun 15, 2016, 10:18 PM
Jun 2016

to break it. Isn't that how the GOP filibusters?

charlyvi

(6,537 posts)
32. Because if one party has 60 votes
Wed Jun 15, 2016, 11:04 PM
Jun 2016

Then the other party agrees that the filibuster is overruled. Without having a talking filibuster. Because no one wants to go through the classic filibuster anymore. That is what makes Murphy's filibuster special. Her is doing an ACTUAL filibuster in the classic sense.

joshcryer

(62,269 posts)
48. They do need 60 votes.
Thu Jun 16, 2016, 03:06 AM
Jun 2016

But to break a physical filibuster would be bad form and it's unlikely they had the votes for it or even the desire to do it. The virtual filibuster has made senators soft in that regard.

 

Adrahil

(13,340 posts)
12. That is an EXTREMELY ableist rule.
Wed Jun 15, 2016, 10:23 PM
Jun 2016

What about someone in a wheelchair? Someone with arthritis?

I have arthritis in both my knees. No way I could stand for more than an hour without intense pain.

 

yeoman6987

(14,449 posts)
15. Most likely you would not filibuster
Wed Jun 15, 2016, 10:28 PM
Jun 2016

And perhaps you could write down your thought as a senator and give it to another senator who could stand for as long as needed. There's ways around everything.

 

Chan790

(20,176 posts)
43. No, it's not...
Wed Jun 15, 2016, 11:58 PM
Jun 2016

but we are talking about the US Senate, the same body that from the founding of the nation until 1990 had a rule forbidding women from wearing men's clothes on the Senate floor...and by men's clothes, they meant pants and flat-soled shoes. If you were called to testify before Congress or were a staffer, you had to wear a dress or skirt and feminine shoes. The Senate has no dress code for men, other than an admonition to dress presentably and appropriately.

My point is that the US Senate hes never been sane or egalitarian where it can be recalcitrant to defend its traditions.

Recursion

(56,582 posts)
21. Either Kerrey or Cleland asked for a ruling at one point
Wed Jun 15, 2016, 10:46 PM
Jun 2016

Though neither of them did a "Mr. Smith" style filibuster during their tenures.

charlyvi

(6,537 posts)
23. OK I tried to find an answer to this but couldn't
Wed Jun 15, 2016, 10:53 PM
Jun 2016

Except for a person who said that not allowing a disabled senator to filibuster would be a violation of the Americans With Disabilities Act. Since no disabled senator has tried a talking filibuster, no solution has been developed for the situation, but I have to think a disabled senator would be allowed to filibuster. If not, I agree with you wholeheartedly.



Mariana

(14,854 posts)
40. Does the ADA apply to the Senate?
Wed Jun 15, 2016, 11:30 PM
Jun 2016

I'm not sure it does - Congress (both houses) have been famous for exempting themselves from laws everyone else has to obey.

PoliticAverse

(26,366 posts)
46. From...
Thu Jun 16, 2016, 12:07 AM
Jun 2016
https://www.ada.gov/q&aeng02.htm

Q. Is the Federal government covered by the ADA?

A. The ADA does not cover the executive branch of the Federal government. The executive branch continues to be covered by title V of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, which prohibits discrimination in services and employment on the basis of handicap and which is a model for the requirements of the ADA. The ADA, however, does cover Congress and other entities in the legislative branch of the Federal government.

sheshe2

(83,710 posts)
20. Wendy Davis is my Hero.
Wed Jun 15, 2016, 10:42 PM
Jun 2016

The Texas state senator whose filibuster of an abortion bill became a national phenomenon has a long history of persisting against tough odds.

Wendy Davis -- the 50-year-old Democrat who stood and spoke for 13 hours Tuesday at the Texas Capitol -- went from being a teen mom to graduating from Harvard Law School.

snip//



"Thank you all for your expressions of support and concern," Davis said on Twitter at the time. "My team and I are concentrating on moving forward and staying focused."

With tens of thousands of new followers Wednesday as a result of her filibuster, Davis tweeted, "Thanks to the powerful voices of thousands of Texans, #SB5 is dead. An incredible victory for Texas women and those who love them."


http://www.cnn.com/2013/06/26/politics/wendy-davis-profile/index.html

Hey! Tampons were confiscated and guns were allowed, Gotta love Texas. Not.



13 hours.

Response to charlyvi (Original post)

Thinkingabout

(30,058 posts)
25. The Republicans do not want a vote on gun control, it will point out their inability to dodge doing
Wed Jun 15, 2016, 10:55 PM
Jun 2016

what is right for the US and they can uphold whatever the NRA wants.

Bucky

(53,986 posts)
39. Sounds like the Senate needs an ADA compliance inspection
Wed Jun 15, 2016, 11:30 PM
Jun 2016

This is inherently discriminatory against any wheelchair-bound senators.

 

Chan790

(20,176 posts)
44. Congress exampted itself from the ADA.
Thu Jun 16, 2016, 12:00 AM
Jun 2016

The only reason the chambers are handi-accessable is because they happen to be, not by intent or design.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»A filibustering senator c...