I’m glad that you and your sister had a chance to be with her and talk to her and help her through those last hours. I’m sure that will be a source of comfort to you in the coming time.

My heart goes out to you, Jane. You’re a strong and a courageous woman.

Much sympathy,

Kathy Kattenburg

Just for contrast, Iraq has a a guess-estimate population of 27 million and a Parliament with 275 members. The U.S. has 300+ million and 535 people involved with lawmaking, so, obviously, the U.S. has over 10 times the population and not even half the the ‘representatives’ that Iraq has.

And lawmakers like Rep. Steve King (R-Iowa) who stated “he ‘prays’ that this country will never be a democracy” (in the McClellan hearing)

The best way to learn House/Senate procedure is in context anyway. A mess of rules is too hard to understand, without a concrete example unfolding. And the beauty of learning in context is that a concrete example generally involves only a few of the rules, so the learning is naturally in little digestible pieces.

Caution (DANGER DANGER!)

I’m a radical righty, so you are almost certain to be in disagreement with my general point of view, which comes through from time to time.

But I do try to paint an accurate picture of history for the record, with links so people can make up their own minds. I don’t aim to impose my point of view, except that I think we’re all better off if each one of us uses our God-given brain independently, with minimum capitulation to propaganda.

The point of cloture is to have LESS time to debate, before voting.

In an ideal deliberative body, all members will become informed, and be prepared to cast a principled vote, before the vote it taken. Under normal function, once a member has a position, he/she is ready to vote; and without having an informed position, shouldn’t be pressed to vote.

The legislative device of cloture is to provide a way to get the entire body to vote, even when some small fraction of the members are not ready to commit. If enough members are ready, then the vote of the body will fairly represent the judgment of the body as a whole. Cloture is used to cut debate short, over the objection of people who haven’t made up their mind yet.

The Senate has been abusing this functional principle – in that it’s a minority of Senators (40 or so voting as a bloc) knowing darn well what position it has, using the power to demand “more debate, debate forever”, and in effect using the parliamentary device that’s intended to let individual members become informed, as a device to withhold the voice of the body as a whole.

A failed cloture motion means (or is supposed to mean), in principle, let’s keep debating until enough of the members can cast a principled/informed vote, one way or the other. The Senate uses (abuses) cloture to OPPOSITE effect. No wonder the public is confused! Often, under a failed cloture motion, the matter is withdrawn from further consideration – debate STOPS, instead of continuing.

But sometimes, the Senate will try cloture over and over and over again, on the same bill or same matter. The most consecutive cloture motions I’ve seen on a single bill is 7 or 8. Keep debating until you are ready to vote, then vote.

One way to look at a NAY cloture vote is “I’m not ready to vote.” This is the principled reason. Another principled justification for voting NAY on cloture is “I reject the terms of debate, so refuse to play your game.” I’m thinking in particular of the situation when one side refuses to permit amendments. A justification that I think is unprincipled (as a matter of parliamentary “majority rule” process – not characterizing the underlying issue) is “My side can’t get a majority, so I’m not going to vote.”

is it that is avoids amendments?

what road does it make it go down that it isn’t going toward anyway–a vote……..

if this is way too elementary to go into, that’s ok, i’ll try to find the mini-courses that ls or cbl2 posted….or something like it, just haven’t taken the time to do it yet…..but will….

i need a senate and house for dummies, but i kinda hate those kinda cliff note books, i want the real info and then tamp it down myself…..that’s why i like your statements of information, just the facts ma’am…….

and i was the one who benefitted a while back from your mccain fec papers posts on your blog……i sent letters, i made calls, and ended up nailing guests on the diane rehm show who were misrepresenting the facts about it, too……..from the documents you provided…..

so, thanks.