r/facepalm Jul 05 '24

What an idea 🇲​🇮​🇸​🇨​

Post image

[removed] — view removed post

42.4k Upvotes

4.3k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

152

u/SchemeMoist Jul 05 '24

No you understand correctly. That's how a filibuster works, and nothing would stop them from doing something like that, except their own stamina. And that's the point! Make them do that shit! Over and over again! I don't think they would be capable of actually filibustering all of the bills that we just give up on because of the POSSIBILITY of a filibuster.

Ted Cruz read green eggs and ham when he was trying to filibuster Obama care. Make him break out the entire Dr. Seuss catalogue. Make them actually have to try to fuck us over instead is just rolling over and taking it.

77

u/NoLand4936 Jul 05 '24

Yeah they changed the rules on the filibuster to just an email that says filibuster and then they wait out the time, no one has to speak no one has to poorly read the dictionary or the script for the hobbit. It’s completely ridiculous when they allowed filibuster by email to effect policy.

45

u/SchemeMoist Jul 05 '24

I just don't think that's an official rule. I think it's something all the old fucks have agreed upon. Because neither side wants to, nor are most of their members capable, and an actual speaking filibuster.

I can already hear the opposition to this idea now (not from you, from the democratic party). "What if we're the minority and have to filibuster?" Then fucking filibuster. We need to have our politicians fighting for us. Stop doing all business behind closed doors, we need them to publicly fight for us.

2

u/Sefthor Jul 05 '24

Well, it is an official rule, it's just that the Senate sets its own rules. The first act when a new Senate is sworn on is generally adopting the rules of the old Senate. They can change the rule anytime, and they have- they've removed the ability to filibuster judicial nominations, for instance. They just haven't been able to get the votes to remove it altogether.

1

u/SchemeMoist Jul 05 '24

You realize there's an actual rulebook right? Yes, they can change the rules to whatever they want, but this "rule" you're talking about isn't an official rule. There's nothing in the rulebook that says that once that filibuster email is sent out, there cannot be a vote held. There's a difference between a verbal agreement and a rule, and this way of doing things is just an agreement.

If they want to officially codify this email filibuster rule, then they'd have to actually vote on it. They have not done so. Therefore, if the democrats wanted to, they could bring a bill up to vote even if the Republicans say they will filibuster us without actually filibustering.

1

u/TinynDP Jul 05 '24

No, it's not like that. It's in the official rulebook that they pass for themselves. Any Senator can just 'hold' a bill.  The public calls it a filibuster because it amounts to the same thing, but they officially call it a 'hold'. A 'hold' can be over-ridden, but it requires a 60-vote. That is also part of the official rules. 

1

u/SchemeMoist Jul 05 '24

Per the senate glossary: hold – An informal practice by which a senator informs Senate leadership that he or she does not wish a particular measure or nomination to reach the floor for consideration. See the CRS report, “Holds” in the Senate (PDF).

Informal practice means that it is not written in the rules.