That's how a filibuster was originally suppose to work. The rule now is that if 41% of the Senate indicates they "intend" to filibuster, then the filibuster is invoked without anyone having to say anything. It's a means for the minority to block a vote.Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't a filibuster when the Senate discusses, at length, a specific bill; therefore, delaying further action on the bill? So, as part of the filibuster process, you would have in your example Republic Senators talking on and on and on about a bill that they don't immediately want to vote on.
Now, in WI and IN, we have representatives who have simply chosen to hide in another state and not show up to work.
I understand that both are delay tactics, but one has the Senator present and the latter does not.
Am I wrong? If so, please educate me.
If I didn't like doing the dirty part of my job, and decided to walk out I would be released from my duties permanantly. Too bad the same thing won't happen to these individuals. You were elected into office to do a job, like it or not, thats the job they have in front of them. Sometimes making hard decisions sucks, but that doesn't (shouldn't) make hiding allowable/acceptable. If they're not willing to voice their opinion of tough decisions, find someone else who is. I'd have their stuff packed up for them when they return.
You were elected into office to do a job, like it or not, thats the job they have in front of them. Sometimes making hard decisions sucks, but that doesn't (shouldn't) make hiding allowable/acceptable. If they're not willing to voice their opinion of tough decisions, find someone else who is. I'd have their stuff packed up for them when they return.
We don't hold politicians accountable in this country. They can even have sex, commit adultery while on the job and when caught just say no I didn't and we let them go. Case in point Dirty Bill Clinton. We hold 18 year old's in the military to a higher set of moral conduct than we do those that Lord over us.
That's how a filibuster was originally suppose to work. The rule now is that if 41% of the Senate indicates they "intend" to filibuster, then the filibuster is invoked without anyone having to say anything. It's a means for the minority to block a vote.
My opinion is that if you want to filibuster something, you should be willing to break out the CFR and USRC and start talking. Bring a lot of water and lozenges.So, what's your opinion of the record number of filibusters the U.S. Senate Republicans invoked the past two years?
I live in NWI. Maybe I will venture over the border this evening. I have an old trick that works mostly on crappy politicians. It's called the "Does this smell like chloroform?" trick. Only dem politicians are dumb enough to smell the rag. Next thing they know they are at the capitol wearing an "I'm ready to vote now!" T-shirt.
WOOHOO!!!!
Here is a list of the cowards who can't stand and do their duty they sware an oath to do.
~ Angry White Boy ~ » The missing Indiana democrats: The List
That's why the rule was changed. Unfortunately, it has had the effect of requiring a super majority to pass measures that one party finds objectionable. This is not in the Constitution.it would appear this would save time for all party members if indeed one party was going to filibuster
I live in NWI. Maybe I will venture over the border this evening. I have an old trick that works mostly on crappy politicians. It's called the "Does this smell like chloroform?" trick. Only dem politicians are dumb enough to smell the rag. Next thing they know they are at the capitol wearing an "I'm ready to vote now!" T-shirt.