SR 107-04: Anti-Filibuster Senate Rules Change (Rejected)

[Mad Deadly Worldwide Communist Gangster Computer God]

Needless to say, I didn't want to have to introduce a rule change, but given that it appears at least some senators intend to abuse our procedures to stop one of the bills on the floor, it is necessary so that we don't allow a minority of the chamber simply to stall legislation it opposes. The Atlasian Senate stands head-and-shoulders above the OTL US Senate, for the simple reason that we, at least ought to, have no rules which can be abused in favor of one party or viewpoint as is the case OTL. That should never be the case in Atlasia, irrespective of the bill's subject matter. And those who intend to continue abusing the rules for short-term legislative gain do so at the expense of the integrity of the legislative process.

If you oppose game-killing rules tricks in the name of sending a message, if you honestly and consistently oppose the filibuster and bringing the filibuster to the Atlasian Senate, I hope you will vote for this rule change so that legislation cannot be held hostage.

[Mad Deadly Worldwide Communist Gangster Computer God]

The gross abuse of the rules we’ve seen on the floor today is simply unacceptable. Section 3.1 is not meant for a minority of Senators to spam silly, frivolous, unserious amendments and then overrule the PPT over and over again so they can block and forever draw out the passage of a bill they don’t like. A minority of the chamber does not get to overrule the wishes of the majority. That is not right, and that is not how it should work in the Atlasian Senate.

I would hope that no Senator would want to replicate the poisonous, toxic mess that is the United States Senate; yet apparently some are hell bent on doing so. This change is reasonable, (although I would like to amend it to 1/2); and ensures a vocal minority cannot derail the Senate agenda. Anyone who opposes the RL filibuster should support this rule change.

Well, one senator's motion plus eight yes votes, so one-half.

This is designed to block debate on bills, enable abuses of power by the PPT, and pass a bill that the President and PPT personally support but many Senators have grave concerns about. I am not comfortable with any changes that weaken the rights of the minority in this Congress and I believe that most Senators want the integrity of the branch preserved first and foremost. With so few checks and balances left in Atlasia, the people need nothing less.

I'm glad that I can finally and confidently say publicly that you are a liar. Unfortunately for you, constantly repeating that the proposed rule change pertains to this bill or that bill doesn't make it so. After all, you are the one with the inconsistent position on the filibuster.

[Mad Deadly Worldwide Communist Gangster Computer God]

Do we need to evict the President from the Senate? Personal insults and threats are entirely unhelpful.

lol

Let's be real, the President can espouse what he wants to, but the need for this rules change is only being brought up because people are daring to seek to protect our children and oppose his darling AWB repeal. If that wasn't happening, this would not be on the floor right now.

I agree with Senator Pericles.

Nope. If a small group of senators was trying to do this to any other bill, I would still be forced to step in and request this rules change. Because there should not be a filibuster.

[Mad Deadly Worldwide Communist Gangster Computer God]

I honestly don't know much about the senate rules in Atlasia, and President Scott's rule seemed fair as portrayed by him and WD. Pericles's comment and subsequent replies, however, have conflicted me. If this is indeed politically motivated (and particularly if it is to support the AWB repeal) then I will oppose it. Honestly, though, I believe Scott inthat this isn't politically motivated. Still, I desperately want the AWB repeal to fail, and if the passage of this rule would undermine this effort, I'd oppose this rule even though I support it in theory, since killing the AWB repeal once and for all is more important.

You can either be honest, and say that you support the filibuster for bills you don't like, or you can oppose it entirely. There's no middle ground here, there's no exceptions to be carved out.

But I will reiterate that I would support the rules change even if the bill being filibustered was one I didn't support - whether it was one repealing the vaccine mandate, banning abortion, rolling back the NGSA, or otherwise, because the Senate is not meant to function this way.

[Mad Deadly Worldwide Communist Gangster Computer God]

I would support the threshold at 50%.

[Mad Deadly Worldwide Communist Gangster Computer God]

40% rounds to 7/18 members (with full turnout) so that's fine.

[Mad Deadly Worldwide Communist Gangster Computer God]

Yes, for the record, I no longer think this is necessary.