It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: TheRedneck
a reply to: Greven
Where in the Senate rules does it state that it requires 60 Senators to control the Senate?
Rule 22
The cloture rule–Rule 22–is the only formal procedure that Senate rules provide for breaking a filibuster. A filibuster is an attempt to block or delay Senate action on a bill or other matter. Under cloture, the Senate may limit consideration of a pending matter to 30 additional hours of debate.
I've never seen such a thing.
Now you have.
Fox News:
Who cares?
I'm wrong about... what exactly? I've not said I support the shutdown. I've not said I support removing the filibuster. I've not said just Democrats or just Republicans are responsible for it.
You're wrong about the difference between majority in the Senate and 'control'... implying that the Republican Party is able to pass whatever they want and there's nothing the Democrats can do about it. That is false.
Your tactic is not to openly blame... you're too clever for that. Your tactic is to insinuate, distract, and twist the entire conversation around in the minds of reader. I've seen it before. It will work, if someone doesn't call you out on your misrepresentations... so I am calling you out.
The Democratic Party, under orders from Sen. Chuck Shumer, filibustered a budget resolution Friday night. They have stated no objection whatsoever to anything in the resolution, despite being asked multiple times if they did. The resolution included pay for firefighters and the military, 6 years of continual funding for CHIP (Children's Health Insurance Program), and provided for continuing defense and research contracts. Those programs are now shut down due solely to the actions of the Senate Democrats.
None of that is under question. It has all been openly admitted by the Democrats themselves who refused to end the filibuster. The only complaint they have is that the budget resolution does not include codification of DACA, which is not only not a budget item, but which has not been agreed to yet and thusly could not have been included.
Please, twist away at that.
TheRedneck
This report discusses major aspects of Senate procedure related to filibusters and cloture. The two, however, are not always closely linked in practice as they are in popular conception. Even when opponents of a measure resort to extended debate or other tactics of delay, supporters may not decide to seek cloture (although this situation seems to have been more common in earlier decades than today). In recent times, by contrast, Senate leadership has increasingly made use of cloture as a normal tool for managing the flow of business on the floor, even when no evident filibuster has yet occurred.
It would be erroneous to assume the presence or absence of cloture attempts is a reliable guide to the specific presence or absence of filibusters.
Cloture may be invoked only on a matter that is pending before the Senate or on unfinished business. It is not in order, except by unanimous consent, to invoke cloture on a bill before the Senate has agreed to consider it. On the other hand, there is no limit on the number of times that the Senate can vote on motions to invoke cloture on a bill, amendment, or other matter it is considering.
Although not explicitly provided for in Senate rules, it has become common practice for the majority leader to make a motion to proceed to consider a measure, immediately file cloture on the motion, and then withdraw the motion to proceed. This allows the Senate to conduct other floor business while the cloture petition is "running" in the background. At the time appointed by Rule XXII, the cloture petition on the motion to proceed is automatically laid before the Senate for a vote.
A filibuster is an attempt to block or delay Senate action on a bill or other matter. Under cloture, the Senate may limit consideration of a pending matter to 30 additional hours of debate.
originally posted by: TheRedneck
a reply to: Greven
You just love to try and complicate issues, don't you? Again, from the United States Senate official web site:
A filibuster is an attempt to block or delay Senate action on a bill or other matter. Under cloture, the Senate may limit consideration of a pending matter to 30 additional hours of debate.
That is a definition from the official web site. If you don't like it, please contact the IT Administrator responsible for the US Senate. I can't help you there.
Now, a few simple questions, all yes or no answers:
- Did Senator Charles (Chuck) Schumer of New York refuse to yield the floor to allow the Continuing Resolution under consideration to be brought to a vote?
- Did Senator Mitch McConnell of Kentucky introduce a motion to invoke cloture in order to limit debate time on the Continuing Resolution under consideration?
- During the vote on cloture for the Continuing Resolution under consideration, did 44 of the 49 Democrat/Independent Senators (I include the two Independents here because they regularly vote with the Democrats) vote to continue debate?
- During the vote on cloture for the Continuing Resolution under consideration, did 47 of the 51 Republican Senators vote to invoke closure and end the debate so a vote could be taken?
- At any time during the debate on the Continuing Resolution under consideration, did any of the Senators voting against cloture express a problem with anything which was included in the Continuing Resolution under consideration?
- Had all 51 Republican Senators voted for cloture, along with the five Democratic Senators that did vote for cloture, would the result have been sufficient to invoke cloture?
- Would the invokation of cloture have brought the debate to an end and allowed a vote on the Continuing Resolution under consideration?
- Did the Continuing resolution under consideration provide funding to the Federal government for a short term beginning at midnight Friday night?
- Did the Federal government officially shut down at midnight Friday night for lack of funding?
- Did this shutdown remove funding from the CHIP program?
- Did this shutdown cause military personnel to stop receiving pay beginning midnight Friday night?
- Did this shutdown cause defense contractors and 'non-essential' government employees to begin receiving notices of expected furloughs?
Now as far as the terminology goes and as for whether or not someone said the word "filibuster" at a specific time or filled out a specific form or did anything else, NO ONE HERE CARES. You are debating semantics, and I choose not to participate in such a worthless discussion. The simple fact is that the government shut down, soldiers are going without pay (and two died this weekend in a helicopter crash in California, working for free), multiple defense contractors are announcing furloughs (including the one that employs my son), and millions of poor American children who depended on the CHIP program to see a doctor are no longer insured. All because Chuck Schumer decided to delay the Continuing Resolution, thereby shutting down the Federal government, by delaying the vote... the definition of a filibuster according to the US Senate, whether it is such according to you or not.
I really don't care if you want to call what he did a jigglinanner... it makes no difference.
Now, care to type out a series of yes or no answers to the questions I asked above, or do you want to just keep on arguing about what the definition of "is" is?
TheRedneck
SO I ASK UNANIMOUS CONSENT THAT THE MANDATORY QUORUM CALL BE WAIVED AND THAT NOTWITHSTANDING RULE 22, THE CLOTURE MOTION FILED ON THE MOTION TO CONCUR IN THE HOUSE AMENDMENT TO THE SENATE AMENDMENT TO H.R. 195 RIPEN AT 10:00 P.M. THURSDAY, JANUARY 18, 10:00 P.M. TONIGHT.
NOW THAT SAME FIXATION, THAT SAME FIXATION, HAS THEM THREATENING TO FILIBUSTER FUNDING FOR THE GOVERNMENT OVER ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION.
I WILL HAVE MORE TO SAY AFTER THIS VOTE ON THE MOTION TO PROCEED WHICH DEMOCRATS WILL SUPPORT, BECAUSE WE WANT TO MOVE FORWARD. WE WANT TO GET SOMETHING DONE. WE DON'T WANT TO KEEP KICKING THE CAN DOWN THE ROAD. BUT I JUST HAD TO ANSWER THE LEADER BRIEFLY. THE LEADER IS LOOKING TO DEFLECT BLAME, BUT IT JUST WON'T WORK. WE ALL KNOW WHAT THE PROBLEM IS. IT'S COMPLETE DISARAY ON THE REPUBLICAN SIDE. THE BOTTOM LINE IS VERY SIMPLE -- OUR LEADER, OUR REPUBLICAN LEADER, HAS SAID THAT HE WILL NOT NEGOTIATE UNTIL HE KNOWS WHERE PRESIDENT TRUMP STANDS. THAT'S WHY NEGOTIATIONS HAVEN'T GOTTEN ANYWHERE.
I'm aware of the definition of filibuster.
No (it hadn't gotten that far, and rather makes the rest unnecessary).
Yes.
Yes.
No (your numbers are off by two - McCain & McConnell did not vote for cloture).
No (debate didn't occur).
No.
No (debate hadn't occurred yet, but invoking cloture would restrict the future debate).
Maybe (not sure, actually; invoking cloture limits debate, but that limit is 30 hours - more than they had).
Yes.
No (funding had already expired in September, though a patch just before Christmas funded it until the 19th).
Yes (might want to talk to McConnell about rejecting funding the military).
Yes.
09:50:27 MR. McCONNELL - I UNDERSTAND THE SENATE HAS RECEIVED A MESSAGE FROM THE HOUSE TO ACCOMPANY H.R. 195.
09:50:31 THE PRESIDING OFFICER - THE SENATOR IS CORRECT.
09:50:34 MR. McCONNELL - MOVE THE CHAIR LAY BEFORE THE SENATE THE MESSAGE AND ASK FOR THE YEAS AND NAYS ON MY MOTION.
09:50:40 THE PRESIDING OFFICER - IS THERE A SUFFICIENT SECOND? THERE APPEARS TO BE. YEAS AND NAYS ARE ORDERED. THE CLERK WILL CALL THE ROLL. VOTE: VOTE: VOTE:
10:29:28 THE PRESIDING OFFICER - ARE THERE ANY SENATORS IN THE CHAMBER WISHING TO VOTE OR TO CHANGE THEIR VOTE? IF NOT, THE YEAS ARE 97, THE NAYS ARE 2. AND THE MOTION IS AGREED TO. THE CHAIR LAYS BEFORE THE SENATE THE FOLLOWING MESSAGE.
10:29:51 THE CLERK - RESOLVED THAT THE HOUSE AGREE TO THE SENATE WITH THE BILL H.R. 195 ENTITLED AN ACT TO AMEND TITLE 44 UNITED STATES CODE AND SO FORTH AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES WITH AN AMENDMENT.
10:30:0? MR. McCONNELL: MR. PRESIDENT.
10:30:05 THE PRESIDING OFFICER - THE MAJORITY LEADER.
10:30:07 MR. McCONNELL - I MOVE TO CONCUR ON THE HOUSE AMENDMENT TO THE SENATE AMENDMENT TO H.R. 195. I ASK UNANIMOUS CONSENT THERE NOW UP TO TEN MINUTES OF DEBATE EQUALLY DIVIDED ON THE MOTION TO CONCUR AND FOLLOWING THE USE OR YIELDING BACK OF TIME THE SENATE VOTE ON THE MOTION TO CONCUR WITH NO INTERVENING ACTION OR DEBATE.
10:30:28 THE PRESIDING OFFICER - IS THERE OBJECTION?
10:30:31 MR. SCHUMER - RESERVING THE RIGHT TO OBJECT.
10:30:33 THE PRESIDING OFFICER - THE DEMOCRATIC LEADER.
10:30:36 MR. SCHUMER - MR. PRESIDENT, I WOULD LIKE TO READ A LETTER FROM DANA W. WHITE, SPOKESPERSON FOR THE PENTAGON. QUOTE, WE HAVE BEEN WORKING ON A CONTINUING RESOLUTION FOR THREE YEARS NOW. OUR CURRENT C.R. EXPIRES 19 JANUARY. THIS IS WASTEFUL AND DESTRUCTIVE. WE NEED A FULLY FUNDED FISCAL YEAR 2018 BUDGET OR FACE RAMIFICATIONS ON OUR MILITARY. THE LEADER WANTS TO MOVE THAT VERY C.R. THAT THE PENTAGON OBJECTS TO, EVEN WITHOUT A 60-VOTE MARGIN. I STRENUOUSLY OBJECT.
10:31:13 MR. McCONNELL - MR. PRESIDENT.
10:31:14 THE PRESIDING OFFICER - OBJECTION IS HEARD. THE MAJORITY LEADER.
10:31:18 MR. McCONNELL - I SEND A CLOTURE MOTION TO THE DESK ON THE MOTION TO CONCUR.
10:31:21 THE PRESIDING OFFICER - THE CLERK WILL REPORT THE CLOTURE MOTION.
10:31:25 THE CLERK - CLOTURE MOTION. WE, THE UNDERSIGNED SENATORS, IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PROVISIONS OF RULE 22 OF THE STANDING RULES OF THE SENATE, DO HEREBY MOVE TO BRING TO A CLOSE DEBATE ON THE MOTION TO CONCUR IN THE HOUSE AMENDMENT TO THE SENATE AMENDMENT TO H.R. 195, SIGNED BY 17 SENATORS AS FOLLOWS.
10:31:41 MR. McCONNELL - I ASK THE READING OF THE NAMES BE DISPENSED WITH.
10:31:44 THE PRESIDING OFFICER - WITHOUT OBJECTION.
10:31:45 MR. McCONNELL - I MOVE TO CONCUR IN THE HOUSE AMENDMENT TO H.R. 195.
10:31:49 MR. SCHUMER - RESERVING THE RIGHT TO OBJECT. NO, SORRY. I'M NOT OBJECTING. MR. PRESIDENT.
10:31:56 MR. McCONNELL - MR. PRESIDENT, I --
10:31:57 THE PRESIDING OFFICER - THE MAJORITY LEADER HAS THE FLOOR.
10:32:00 MR. SCHUMER - GO AHEAD.
10:32:01 MR. McCONNELL - I MOVE TO CONCUR IN THE HOUSE AMENDMENT TO 195 WITH A FURTHER AMENDMENT.
10:32:05 THE PRESIDING OFFICER -THE CLERK WILL REPORT.
10:32:07 THE CLERK - THE SENATOR FROM KENTUCKY, MR. McCONNELL, MOVES TO CONCUR IN THE HOUSE AMENDMENT TO THE SENATE AMENDMENT TO H.R. 195 WITH AN AMENDMENT NUMBERED 1903.
10:32:18 MR. McCONNELL - I ASK THE READING BE DISPENSED WITH.
10:32:21 THE PRESIDING OFFICER - WITHOUT OBJECTION.
10:32:23 MR. McCONNELL - I ASK FOR THE YEAS AND NAYS ON THE MOTION TO CONCUR WITH AMENDMENTS.
10:32:26 THE PRESIDING OFFICER - IS THERE A SUFFICIENT SECOND? THERE APPEARS TO BE. THE YEAS AND NAYS ARE ORDERED.
10:32:34 MR. McCONNELL - I HAVE A SECOND-DEGREE AMENDMENT AT THE DESK.
10:32:37 THE PRESIDING OFFICER - THE CLERK WILL REPORT.
10:32:40 THE CLERK - THE SENATOR FROM KENTUCKY, MR. McCONNELL, PROPOSES AN AMENDMENT NUMBERED 1904 TO AMENDMENT NUMBERED 1903.
10:32:47 MR. McCONNELL - ASK THE READING BE DISPENSED WITH.
10:32:50 THE PRESIDING OFFICER - WITHOUT OBJECTION.
10:32:52 MR. McCONNELL - I MOVE TO REFER THE HOUSE MESSAGE ON H.R. 195 TO THE COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS TO REPORT BACK FORTHWITH WITH INSTRUCTION.
10:33:01 THE PRESIDING OFFICER - THE CLERK WILL REPORT.
10:33:03 THE CLERK - THE SENATOR FROM KENTUCKY, MR. McCONNELL, MOVES TO REPORT THE HOUSE MESSAGE ON H.R. 195 TO THE COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS TO REPORT BACK FORTHWITH WITH INSTRUCTIONS BEING AMENDMENT NUMBERED 1905.
10:33:17 MR. McCONNELL - I ASK FOR THE YEAS AND NAYS ON MY MOTION.
10:33:19 THE PRESIDING OFFICER - IS THERE A SUFFICIENT SECOND? THERE IS. THE YEAS AND NAYS ARE ORDERED.
10:33:28 MR. McCONNELL - I HAVE AN AMENDMENT TO THE INSTRUCTIONS.
10:33:32 THE PRESIDING OFFICER - THE CLERK WILL REPORT.
10:33:34 THE CLERK - THE SENATOR FROM KENTUCKY, MR. McCONNELL, PROPOSES AN AMENDMENT NUMBERED 1906 TO THE INSTRUCTIONS OF THE MOTION TO REFER H.R. 1905 TO THE COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS.
10:33:48 MR. McCONNELL - I ASK THE READING BE DISPENSED WITH.
10:33:50 THE PRESIDING OFFICER - WITHOUT OBJECTION
10:33:51 MR. McCONNELL - I ASK FOR THE YEAS AND NAYS ON MY AMENDMENT.
10:33:53 THE PRESIDING OFFICER - IS THERE A SUFFICIENT SECOND? THERE IS. THE YEAS AND NAYS ARE ORDERED.
10:33:59 MR. McCONNELL - I HAVE A SECOND-DEGREE AMENDMENT AT THE DESK.
10:34:02 THE PRESIDING OFFICER - THE CLERK WILL REPORT.
10:34:03 THE CLERK - THE SENATOR FROM KENTUCKY, MR. McCONNELL, PROPOSES AN AMENDMENT NUMBERED 1907 TO AMENDMENT NUMBERED 1906.
10:34:21 MR. SCHUMER - MR. PRESIDENT, TO DELAY A VOTE ON CLOTURE WHEN WE ALL KNOW THE OUTCOME MAKES NO SENSE...THURSDAY, JANUARY 18, 10:00 P.M. TONIGHT.
10:36:12 THE PRESIDING OFFICER - IS THERE OBJECTION?
10:36:14 MR. McCONNELL - I OBJECT.
Are you still going to argue that there was a filibuster in here somewhere?
originally posted by: TheRedneck
a reply to: Greven
Are you still going to argue that there was a filibuster in here somewhere?
No, because Schumer was right about one thing... the uselessness of trying to debate with a bowl of jello. You've made up your mind you know exactly what you're talking about... so be it.
It's a moot point anyway. Schumer blinked. The Schumer Shutdown is over, at least until February the 8th.
TheRedneck
originally posted by: Greven
You are aware that McConnell held this vote to invoke cloture, to prevent a filibuster, but had secured 5 Democrat votes for simple majority passage (because 4 Republicans intended to vote against it), yes?
Who was the Senator who intended to filibuster?
If nobody really intended to filibuster, then this is all a ploy by McConnell for political gain.
Majority Party (November 12, 2002 - January 3, 2003): Republican (50 seats)
Minority Party: Democrat (48 seats)
Other Parties: 2
Total Seats: 100
Note: From January 3 to January 20, 2001, with the Senate divided evenly between the two parties, the Democrats held the majority due to the deciding vote of outgoing Democratic Vice President Al Gore. Senator Thomas A. Daschle served as majority leader at that time. Beginning on January 20, 2001, Republican Vice President Richard Cheney held the deciding vote, giving the majority to the Republicans. Senator Trent Lott resumed his position as majority leader on that date. On May 24, 2001, Senator James Jeffords of Vermont announced his switch from Republican to Independent status, effective June 6, 2001. Jeffords announced that he would caucus with the Democrats, giving the Democrats a one-seat advantage, changing control of the Senate from the Republicans back to the Democrats. Senator Thomas A. Daschle again became majority leader on June 6, 2001. Senator Paul D. Wellstone (D-MN) died on October 25, 2002, and Independent Dean Barkley was appointed to fill the vacancy. The November 5, 2002 election brought to office elected Senator James Talent (R-MO), replacing appointed Senator Jean Carnahan (D-MO), shifting balance once again to the Republicans -- but no reorganization was completed at that time since the Senate was out of session.