Fillibusters work because every person gets an opportunity to talk but their time is unlimited . So practically if people can just keep talking they can go on and on and on using up time until eventually the debate goes into recess or the session ends and hence nothing proceeds.
So like Mr. Smith Goes to Washington is pretty true? Are you able to site or eat during this time or the restroom? Or do you know all this going in and take care of business first?
Basically whichever party is the minority, they can use it to help their agenda. And whichever holds more power can't move forward without opposition. It's a stupid but valuable tool that keeps the minority group from being completely powerless to the majority whim.
assuming US Senate: bills need 51 votes to pass, but by senate rules, the actual vote doesn't happen until the debate period ends. because of this, historically, one person could simply stall the vote forever by talking, because the vote can't happen until they finish. 60 senators can vote to end debate, and if the bill has 60 supporters, it's going to get 51 votes in the actual vote for obvious math reasons. for reasons nobody really understands, the actual requirement for someone to talk got removed; now any senator can say "i declare neverending debate" and stop the vote from happening unless the other team has 60.
When did that happen? Today they still make a big deal about the Fillibuster. I just always wondered how people pulled it off. Like that one senator who asked his page to read the whole epstein file which was 3000 pages or something. And get paid very very little.
Yeah, they used to just get up and talk. Start reading names from a phone book or whatever. Bernie did an actual fillabuster some years ago and Booker or someone like that did one several months ago, breaking the fucker Strom Thurmond's previous record. Now, with the average age of Congress something like 132, they just feebly stand with their canes and pathetic past-retirement age voices and declare "...filibuster!..." and that does the same thing. These fuckers would rather get back to all their insider trading an grifting than actually have to put the time in.
abeorch
in reply to Don_Dickle • •Explain Like I'm Five reshared this.
Don_Dickle
in reply to abeorch • • •Don_Dickle
in reply to abeorch • • •JigglySackles
in reply to Don_Dickle • • •aaa999
in reply to Don_Dickle • • •bills need 51 votes to pass, but by senate rules, the actual vote doesn't happen until the debate period ends. because of this, historically, one person could simply stall the vote forever by talking, because the vote can't happen until they finish. 60 senators can vote to end debate, and if the bill has 60 supporters, it's going to get 51 votes in the actual vote for obvious math reasons. for reasons nobody really understands, the actual requirement for someone to talk got removed; now any senator can say "i declare neverending debate" and stop the vote from happening unless the other team has 60.
aaa999
in reply to aaa999 • • •additionally, yes people have just stalled by talking, prior to the period we dropped the requirement for them to do that. most famously
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strom_Th…
longest U.S. Senate filibuster
Contributors to Wikimedia projects (Wikimedia Foundation, Inc.)Don_Dickle
in reply to aaa999 • • •sin_free_for_00_days
in reply to Don_Dickle • • •