The arcane processes and procedures that govern the United States Senate are known to be good bedtime reading: They put you to sleep.
Sen. Robert Byrd, D-W.Va., is a master of Senate rules. In earlier days, he would stand, often alone on the floor of the Senate, and give a history lesson on the Senate. For those who lack anything better to do, the Byrd lectures were fascinating glimpses into the operation of the world's most deliberative body.
The Senate gained the deliberative mantle for allowing any senator to slow down the actions of the chamber. Over time rules have been modified, but the basic intent remains: Unlike the boisterous House of Representatives, the senators have a small arsenal of parliamentary tricks that can make a turtle appear to be moving at greased-lightning speed.
The filibuster is one technique at the disposal of a senator or group of senators, but there are some misconceptions as to how and when it is used.
The health care reform bill moving through the Congress was the latest test of the filibuster or lack thereof.
At one time two-thirds of the senators were required to vote to move ahead with legislation. Today the number is three-fifths, or 60 votes. This super-majority is an early show of strength, typically by one political party, but often the action is only a door opener.
The Democrats, with 58 senators, had to hold on to their votes and add two independents to muster the 60 votes to allow the health care bill to come to the floor of the Senate. At the conclusion of the vote, three of the Democratic senators indicated that unless a handful of issues were resolved during floor action, their vote might not be available to shut down an expected second filibuster.
Without a time agreement to limit debate and amendments, the Senate majority leader, Harry Reid of Nevada, will be forced to round up another 60 votes to end the debate and set up a time for a final up-or-down vote in the Senate. If he reaches that point in the process, a simple majority is required for final passage.
When Sen. Blanche Lincoln, D-Ark., who is facing a 2010 re-election challenge, voted with her party to move ahead with consideration of the health care bill, she was quickly reminded that her vote or a replacement vote will be required later.
While the filibuster is viewed as protecting the rights of the
minority or indicating strength or weakness for a piece of legislation, others believe the mere threat of a filibuster forces concessions and bipartisan dialogue.
Whether backers of the highly charged health care legislation will be able to round up a handful of Republican votes to offset potential lost Democratic votes is yet to be seen.
Wrapped up in the health care debate is a little policy and a lot of politics.
Republicans wrestle with the responsible action of charting a reform path or standing fast for a political gain; both options are tantalizing but it is too early in the debate to determine the GOP's course of action.
There will be another point in the Senate debate when passage or failure can be predicted, and that is when next there is a call for a cloture vote, limiting discussion. At that time a few Republican senators probably need to be in the pro-health care reform camp.
The media should be careful not to dwell on the senator of the moment or the political posturing of the day and follow the path of the debate. For in those reports, the public will get a glimpse into the history of the Senate and the reason for the tag "the world's most deliberative body."
To reach Tom Griscom, call 423-757-6472 or e-mail tgriscom@timesfreepress.com.
Or login with:
New Account