uggabugga

HOME RSS | .

Monday, April 18, 2005

After 51 votes, then what?

People are saying that Bill Frist "has the votes" to invoke the nuclear option. By that, they mean 51 votes (or a maximum of 55). This is supposed to be enough to change the Senate rules and disallow the filibuster for, at least, votes on judicial nominees. But is it?

Last week, Stephen Moore, formerly of the Club for Growth, and now of the Free Enterprise Fund co-wrote a Washington Post Op-Ed defending the filibuster. In it, we read:

It is clear to us that it takes a two-thirds majority (67 votes) to change the Senate's standing rules.

Later that same day (15 April) on PBS' News Hour, Mark Shields had this to say:

... the Congressional Reference Service, the Library of Congress came out this week and said they actually need two-thirds of the Senate to change the rules.

So some people think two-thirds is required. If Frist calls for a vote and gets between 51 and 55 votes, then what?

Who makes the call? It could get crazy.

Well, to tell the truth, it's already crazy.

posted by Quiddity at 4/18/2005 11:09:00 AM

2 comments

This is the whole point. Basically, it involves getting a corrupt parliamentarian to just declare that 51 is enough.

By Anonymous, at 4/18/2005 11:30 AM

The thing that I don't understand is:

1) If it only takes..., then is there a logical reason for the Republicans not to declare that all filibusters can be closed by 51 votes so that they can get both their judges and their legislation thru? -- Or is it just that they think it would be harder to get the 50+ votes for judical filibuster killing

2) In fact, it seems to me that the judges, who have life time appointment should logically be more reasonably consented to by a super mahority than laws, that can be repealed if they need to be. A bad judge is in power for life, where as a bad law can be un-done.

By Mike Liveright, at 4/19/2005 12:16 AM