Thune says he’ll force a vote on the SAVE Act

Correct me if wrong, but this would only be to break the filibuster and move to an actual majority vote?

Is this where they pull the football out from under Charlie Brown again?

Getting them on record is fine, but I would rather see it pass. He needs to change the filibuster rules and pass it.

Why is this so hard?

quote:

---

Correct me if wrong, but this would only be to break the filibuster and move to an actual majority vote?

---

thought i read where the GOP was looking into bringing back the "talking Filibuster" as a floor rule.

until 1917, there was no mechanism to end debate, as long as someones was on the floor talking. 1917, the senate passed rules to allow a cloture vote. the senate rules were again changed in 1970 (Senator Byrd)

IMO, this will not work either, as you will get another 25hr+ marathon with cory booker speaking endlessly...but i guess can they actually go on endlessly or not is the question.....

quote:

---

Getting them on record is fine, but I would rather see it pass. He needs to change the filibuster rules and pass it.

---

They don't have to change the rules. The standing filibuster will wear out the Dems before Republicans.

If only he believed in this himself- Poon Thune

Everything below if from this link ( Explainer), which I posted before. Bottom line - Republicans can get this done with barely any work. It's just a question of whether or not they want to show up for work.
----
From 1806 to 1917, the only way to end debate in the Senate was for senators to stop debating. There was no cloture mechanism or vote to end debate.

In 1917, the Senate adopted a new rule (Rule XXII) that added cloture at a two-thirds majority.2 Cloture is the mechanism to end debate. Between 1917 and 1975, the cloture threshold was 67 votes, which is how Southern Democrats were able to filibuster civil rights legislation for so long despite the existence of cloture. There simply weren’t 67 votes to invoke cloture to end debate.

In 1975, the threshold for cloture was lowered to a three-fifths majority: 60 votes. That is the current rule.3

It is important to note that the addition of cloture did not eliminate the traditional and original practice of limitless debate, which could result in a talking filibuster. The ability to filibuster by endlessly talking on the Senate floor is still a part of the Senate rules, but it is currently not used because of the cloture mechanism....

How the Talking Filibuster Could Be Used to Pass the SAVE Act

Here’s how the current Senate majority could pass the SAVE Act without ending the filibuster or “going nuclear.”

The Majority Leader would make the SAVE Act the pending business before the Senate. He would not file a cloture petition on it.

Once the SAVE Act is the pending business of the Senate, debate can begin indefinitely.

However, per Standing Senate Rule XIX, senators are limited to two speeches per legislative day on the same question during the debate on the bill. A legislative day is not a calendar day; it is the period beginning when the Senate convenes and ending when it adjourns. Legislative days do not align with calendar days. A single legislative day can last several days, weeks, or even months. In this scenario, the legislative day would last as long as debate continues on the SAVE Act and through a vote on the bill.

This means that all 47 Democrat senators in the minority, should they oppose the bill, would have two indefinite times to speak on the SAVE Act. Each time period could last several days, weeks, or months, depending on the senator’s stamina. This approach would mean Democrat senators were engaging in a talking filibuster. Per the Senate Rules and tradition, when holding the floor and speaking, a senator cannot sit, cannot take bathroom breaks, and cannot consume anything except water or, by existing precedent, milk.

Throughout the filibuster, senators opposed to the bill would try several parliamentary tactics to derail the bill. This includes calling votes on motions to adjourn, requesting votes on amendments, and conducting a quorum call that forces all senators to the Senate floor to be counted as present. In this scenario, Republican senators in the majority must stay at or near the Senate floor to be present for voting on these measures or to be counted during a quorum call.

Ultimately, the talking filibuster on the SAVE Act would end with either all of the opposing Democrat senators using up their two speeches each or one side giving up due to exhaustion.

If the Republican majority can outlast the Democrat minority speeches (which could take weeks) or can exhaust enough Democrat senators to the point of signing a cloture petition to end debate (currently, there must be at least seven Democrat votes to reach 60 for cloture), then a final vote on the SAVE Act would take place at a simple majority threshold of 51 votes.

Is he getting rid of the zombie filibuster?? If not this is just smoke.