Senate Filibuster Tradition
Changing the Tradition of the Senate Filibuster There is a long-standing tradition that sets the U.S. Senate apart from all other government institutions, the filibuster. The term “filibuster,” from Dutch origins, became popular in the 1850’s when it became attributed to efforts by Senators to hold the Senate floor in order to prevent the vote on a bill (U.S. Senate). Since then, unlimited debate has continued to characterize the Senate and allow any senator the right to speak endlessly. As of recent, talk of changing the Senate filibuster rule has gotten a lot of attention. This change, proposed by Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid tries to weaken the power of the filibuster by reducing the threshold for the amount of votes necessary to
…show more content…
With the continued threat of the use of the filibuster, the majority party needed to establish a method to end debate and get bills voted on. In 1917, the first change to the filibuster came when Senators adopted Senate Rule XXII, known as “cloture.” This rule allowed the Senate to end a debate with a two-thirds majority vote. The new Senate rule was first used in 1919 when cloture ended debate of a filibuster against the Treaty of Versailles (U.S. Senate). In 1975, the second change to this rule occurred when the number of required votes for cloture decreased from a two-thirds vote to three-fifths, or sixty votes (U.S. …show more content…
It has had adverse effects on the Senate confirmation of presidential appointees because it has allowed the minority party to delay confirmation of these nominations simply due to party affiliation rather than lack of qualifications for the position. The role of the President is interconnected with this role of the Senate: “The Constitution states that the President shall nominate, and by and with the advise and consent of the Senate, shall appointment ambassadors, other Public Ministers and Counsels, Judges of the Supreme Court and all other officers of the United States…” (Brookings). Therefore, the inability to confirm presidential nominees not only affects the productivity of Congress, but it also affects the President’s ability to fulfill his responsibilities. On the other hand, some see the use of the filibuster as a positive tradition that has been maintained within the Senate over the centuries. It is a unique characteristic that makes the Senate known for the power it allocates to individual Senators as well as individuals of the minority party; allowing Senators to speak against bills that they do not support and cripple their passage until further discussion or compromise takes
With the continued threat of the use of the filibuster, the majority party needed to establish a method to end debate and get bills voted on. In 1917, the first change to the filibuster came when Senators adopted Senate Rule XXII, known as “cloture.” This rule allowed the Senate to end a debate with a two-thirds majority vote. The new Senate rule was first used in 1919 when cloture ended debate of a filibuster against the Treaty of Versailles (U.S. Senate). In 1975, the second change to this rule occurred when the number of required votes for cloture decreased from a two-thirds vote to three-fifths, or sixty votes (U.S. …show more content…
It has had adverse effects on the Senate confirmation of presidential appointees because it has allowed the minority party to delay confirmation of these nominations simply due to party affiliation rather than lack of qualifications for the position. The role of the President is interconnected with this role of the Senate: “The Constitution states that the President shall nominate, and by and with the advise and consent of the Senate, shall appointment ambassadors, other Public Ministers and Counsels, Judges of the Supreme Court and all other officers of the United States…” (Brookings). Therefore, the inability to confirm presidential nominees not only affects the productivity of Congress, but it also affects the President’s ability to fulfill his responsibilities. On the other hand, some see the use of the filibuster as a positive tradition that has been maintained within the Senate over the centuries. It is a unique characteristic that makes the Senate known for the power it allocates to individual Senators as well as individuals of the minority party; allowing Senators to speak against bills that they do not support and cripple their passage until further discussion or compromise takes