A filibuster, or 'talking out a bill', is a form of ...



The Filibuster

A filibuster, or "talking out a bill", is a form of obstruction in a legislature or other decision-making body. An attempt is made to infinitely extend debate upon a proposal in order to delay the progress or completely prevent a vote on the proposal taking place.

The term 'filibuster' was first used in 1851. It was derived from the Spanish filibustero meaning 'pirate' or 'freebooter'. This term had in turn evolved from the French word flibustier, which itself evolved from the Dutch vrijbuiter (freebooter). This term was applied at the time to American adventurers, mostly from Southern states, who sought to overthrow the governments of Central American states, and was transferred to the users of the filibuster, seen as a tactic for pirating or hijacking debate.

Ancient Rome

One of the earliest known practitioners of the filibuster was the Roman senator Cato the Younger. In debates over legislation he especially opposed, Cato would often obstruct the measure by speaking continuously until nightfall. As the Roman Senate had a rule requiring all business to conclude by dusk, Cato's purposefully long-winded speeches were an effective device to forestall a vote.

United Kingdom

In the Parliament of the United Kingdom, a bill defeated by a filibustering maneuver may be said to have been "talked out." Procedural rules in the British House of Commons do not allow Members to speak on just any subject; they must stick to the topic of the debate.

United States

The term first came into use in the United States Senate, where Senate rules permit a senator, or a series of senators, to speak for as long as they wish and on any topic they choose, unless a supermajority of three-fifths of the Senate (60 Senators, if all 100 seats are filled) brings debate to a close by invoking cloture.

In 1789, the first U.S. Senate adopted rules allowing the Senate "to move the previous question," which means to take a vote on whether or not to end debate and proceed to a vote on the bill in question. Aaron Burr argued that the motion regarding the vote to end debate and hold a vote on the bill was redundant, had only been exercised once in the preceding four years, and should be eliminated. In 1806, the Senate agreed, officially changing its rules, and thus the potential for a filibuster sprang into being. Because the Senate created no alternative mechanism for terminating debate, the filibuster became an option for delay and blocking of floor votes.

The filibuster remained a solely theoretical option until 1841, when the Democratic minority tried to block a bank bill favored by the Whig majority by using this political tactic. Senator Henry Clay, a promoter of the bill, threatened to change Senate rules to allow the majority to close debate. Missouri Senator Thomas Hart Benton rebuked Clay for trying to stifle the Senate's right to unlimited debate and Clay was unsuccessful in eliminating the filibuster with a simple majority vote.

In 1917 a rule allowing for the cloture of debate (ending a filibuster) was adopted by the Democratic Senate at the urging of President Woodrow Wilson. From 1917 to 1949, the requirement for cloture was two-thirds of those voting. In 1946 Southern Senators blocked a vote on a bill proposed by Democrat Dennis Chavez of New Mexico (S.B. 101) that would have created a permanent Fair Employment Practices Committee (FEPC) to prevent discrimination in the work place. The filibuster lasted weeks, and Senator Chavez was forced to remove the bill from consideration after a failed cloture vote even though he had enough votes to pass the bill.

Senator Strom Thurmond (D/R-SC) set a record in 1957 by filibustering the Civil Rights Act of 1957 for 24 hours and 18 minutes, although the bill ultimately passed. Thurmond broke the previous record of 22 hours and 26 minutes which Wayne Morse (I-OR) had established in 1953 protesting the Tidelands Oil legislation. One of the most notable filibusters of the 1960s was when southern Democratic Senators attempted, unsuccessfully, to block the passage of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 by making a filibuster that lasted for 75 hours.

Preparations for a traditional filibuster have been known to be very elaborate. Sometimes cots are brought into the hallways or cloakrooms for senators to sleep on. While in a filibuster the senator talking must remain in the same spot and is only allowed to filibuster twice in a legislative day. A legislative day lasts until the debate is adjourned, which can take days. According to Newsweek:

They used to call it 'taking to the diaper,' a phrase that referred to the preparation undertaken by a prudent senator before an extended filibuster. Strom Thurmond visited a steam room before his filibuster in order to dehydrate himself so he could drink without urinating. An aide stood by in the cloakroom with a pail in case of emergency.

After a series of filibusters led by Southern Democrats in the 1960s over civil rights legislation, the Democratic-controlled Senate in 1975 revised its cloture rule so that three-fifths of the Senators could limit debate and end a filibuster.

The filibuster has tremendously increased in frequency of use since the 1960s. In the 1960s, no Senate term had more than seven filibusters. Twice as many filibusters took place in the 1991-1992 legislative session as took place in the entire nineteenth century. In the first decade of the 21st century, no Senate term had fewer than 49 filibusters. The 110th Congress broke the record for filibuster cloture votes reaching 112 at the end of 2008.

In current practice, Senate Rule 22 permits filibusters in which actual continuous floor speeches are not required, although the Senate Majority Leader may require an actual traditional filibuster if he or she so chooses. This threat of a filibuster where no floor speech and no quorum is required may therefore be more powerful than an actual filibuster that would require attendance by a quorum of Senators as well as the physical presence of the Senators speaking.

Previously, the filibustering senator(s) could delay voting only by making an endless speech. Currently, they need only indicate that they are filibustering, thereby preventing the Senate from moving on to other business until the motion is withdrawn or enough votes are gathered for cloture.

Canada

Filibustering has a long history in Canadian politics also and can be found at all levels of government. Most attempts at stalling legislation in Canada are usually just for show and last a relatively short period of time. But a unique form of filibuster was pioneered by the Ontario New Democratic Party in the Legislative Assembly of Ontario in April 1997. To protest legislation that would lump together Toronto with all of its surrounding suburban communities into one megacity, the small New Democratic caucus introduced 11,500 amendments to the megacity bill, created on computers with mail merge functionality. Each amendment would name a street in the proposed city, and provide that public hearings be held regarding the megacity with residents of the street invited to participate.

The filibuster began on April 2 and occupied the legislature day and night, the members alternating in shifts. On April 4, exhausted and often sleepy government members inadvertently let one of the NDP amendments pass, and the handful of residents of Cafon Court in Etobicoke were granted the right to a public consultation on the bill (the government subsequently nullified this with an amendment of their own). With a vote needed on each amendment, Zorra Street was not reached until April 8. The NDP amendments were voted down one by one, and the filibuster finally ended on April 11.

................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download