Anybody watching C-Span 2? Senators again debate the debate on Iraq

[TayTay]

I have only heard half of this. Sen. Reid tried to introduce the House Res on voicing objection to the troop escalation and again was shot down by McConnell who wants amendments allowed. Reid said that this would be without amendments and that the McCain and Gregg amendments would go on another bill further down the line.

Anyone watching this?

[rodeodance]

1. no, as i have been working--but will take a peep if I can Thanks

[TayTay]

2. It's not new content

It's the same bottle-neck as prevented debate last time. But, Sen. Reid took to the floor, anounced a Dem caucus for Senators, then left, came back with text and asked to unanimous consent to bring the House Res 63 (I think) to the floor without amendments. Massive objections from McConnell.

Maybe the recess is slightly on the line this time. Hagel and Snowe said that they would not permit the Senate to recess for a week if the debate was not scheduled.

McConnell wants the House Res, the Warner Res and the McCain-Lieberman-Graham and the Gregg amendment all up. No amendments in order to any of these. Then the Senate have 4 votes, one right after the other. (After 12 hours of debate, total, I think.)

Reid says modify this. Says he wants the House Res, and the McCain amendment only.

Nope, no dice. They each objected to each other's motions. (How Senate of them.)

[rodeodance]

6. they should NOT have recess until the Vote is done!

[rodeodance]

7. k

[rodeodance]

8. k

[TayTay]

11. I love it when Sen. Byrd gives his lesson on Senate rules

He just cold knows this stuff.

[TayTay]

9. I agree, but unlikely

This is a real impasse. Both sides want what they want. I think the recess might actually pressure some Repubs to come back and press for debate after hearing about this from their constituents.

[rodeodance]

3. mcconnel wants Amendments

[rodeodance]

4. Dubin saying sev. Repugs voted against it already

[TayTay]

5. Yup, he wants 4, Reid wants 2

So, there is no compromise. And probably no resolution of this impasse.

[rodeodance]

10. Byrd lecturing them on the Rules. te he

[rodeodance]

12. "fill the tree"???????

[rodeodance]

13. Specter claiming the Senate is becoming Irrelavant.

[rodeodance]

14. Specter is riled up---he says he can not explain to his constituants what

the Heck is going on in the senate!!!!!!!!!!

[rodeodance]

15. k

[rodeodance]

17. specter------there is Gridlock inthe senate

[rodeodance]

18. Ted Stevens just had a Cow-----a big ONE.

[rodeodance]

19. k

[TayTay]

16. What does filling the tree mean?

Look here:

Old explanation of this from C-Span: http://www.c-span.org/questions/weekly78.asp

The "amendment tree" is the colloquial term used to describe the diagram which governs the amending process in the Senate. The diagram shows the possibilities available for offering amendments: the bill under debate is considered the trunk of the tree, and the branches growing out from the trunk illustrate where and in what order amendments can be offered. The House uses the same concept but only has one tree, whereas the Senate has four to choose from, depending on the parliamentary circumstances.

Senator Lott is the Majority Leader of the Senate. In that capacity, he gets favored for recognition over any other Senator. Although it is a very controversial move, Majority Leaders have from time to time used that preferential recognition to offer one amendment after another until all the branches of the amendment tree are full. Until an amendment is voted upon, emptying the branch, no more amendments are in order. This has the effect of shutting out Senators from offering policy alternatives until those favored by the Majority Leader are completed. Majority Leaders have the full procedural right to take advantage of their preferential recognition; however it is not without political cost. Obviously, shutting out other Senators' opportunities to restrict or expand upon the bill text through amendments of their own is controversial. It has often produced resentment -- but also policy victories -- which is why the tactic is still sometimes employed.

[rodeodance]

20. hey thanks

[TayTay]

23. You're welcome

The arcane rules of the Senate are ahm, not to be consumed in one sitting. This stuff is really difficult to get. I love that C-Span had a chart. Made it much easier to get. (Okay, not really, but it was better.)

[DesertRat]

22. I love Sen. Byrd. 89 years old and still sharp. n/t

[DesertRat]

21. I'm home sick today flipping back and forth between C-Span and C-Span 2

On C-Span, each member of the House is being given 5 min. to speak up on where they stand on the war.

[Norquist Nemesis]

25. Every other five minutes of CSPAN I'm feeling sick

:P

Hope you're feeling better soon!

[DesertRat]

26. The Repub apologists are so predictable. And thanks. n/t

[Norquist Nemesis]

24. Help me out on recent history, please

In the 109th, Democrats could not get their amendments to the floor. Most of the time they were voted down along party lines at the committee level, IIRC. But I also seem to recall witnessing plenty of times that our Democrats would try to introduce their amendments and they were shot down as 'not germaine to the bill' or were (can't recall the term) second amendments(?) in violation of the rules because they dealt with funding/committee jurisdiction.

It seems to me if that's the case, the Democrats should let the Amendments come through, and then ask for a point of order and throw them out as not being germaine. :shrug: