Skip ahead to: Episode 1 | Episode 2 | Latest News
Cloture? Quorum? A “60-Vote” Senate? If you’re confused by these terms, you’re not alone. In recent years, there has been a lot of debate in Washington about the increasing use of the filibuster in the U.S. Senate to obstruct legislation supported by a majority of members. When we think of a filibuster, we think of a politician talking through the night. We think of it as an act of physical defiance in opposition to a particular policy proposal. But while we hear lots about the filibuster in the modern-day Senate, we rarely see such spectacles.
If you’ve always wanted to know how we went from “live” filibusters to “stealth” filibusters, Newsbound has you covered.
Over time, we’ll be gradually adding episodes to the Filibustery stack. If you want to be notified when we add new content, sign up for our email alerts. If you want to skip ahead to the latest developments in this story, head to the bottom of this page. And if you want to join the behind-the-scenes conversation as we develop new episodes, head over to our blog.
QUESTIONS ANSWERED IN THIS EPISODE: Where in the legislative process does a filibuster usually arise? What are the motivations of the filibuster supporters? What are the majority party’s possible responses when faced with the threat of a filibuster? Which one do they usually choose? Why does it take 60 votes to “overcome” a filibuster in the modern-day Senate?
Watch the full episode below or read the text version (with links).
THE SHORT VERSION: In order to wrap your head around the “live” filibuster you have to think about the costs incurred by both sides. On the one hand, the goal of the filibustering party is to get the majority to ultimately abandon a bill that is nearing final passage in the Senate. When the opponents of this bill launch a live filibuster, they are signaling that they plan to “continue the debate” indefinitely. The obvious question is: Who will give in first? Will the filibustering party exhaust itself and finally allow the bill to proceed to a vote? Or will the bill’s supporters decide that they can’t afford to waste this much time when there is so much other legislation that needs to be considered?
The answer depends on which side is incurring a greater cost as the live filibuster stretches on. In the modern-day Senate, the bill’s supporters almost always face a greater cost. There are a variety of reasons for this. First of all, time is more valuable than ever in the Senate chamber thanks to the hectic schedule kept by your average senator. Second, it’s now common for 30 or 40 members of the minority party to threaten a live filibuster, meaning that the physical cost of “continuing the debate” can be distributed across the group (as they take turns, one by one, holding the Senate floor for several hours). In such a scenario, most of the physical cost rests on the shoulders of the bill supporters, who have to keep at least 50 senators on or near the chamber floor for the duration of the filibuster (due to the quorum requirement).
That’s why the mere threat of a filibuster is so powerful today. Indeed, rather than incur the costs of waiting out a live filibuster, the majority party generally surrenders or attempts to invoke cloture — a procedural maneuver that circumvents a filibuster, but requires 60 votes to pass.
QUESTIONS (TO BE) ANSWERED IN THIS EPISODE: When exactly did the “stealth filibuster” replace the “live filibuster”? Did changes in the culture of the Senate lead to this shift? What other technological or societal forces played a part? How did the Senate decide on 60 votes as the threshold for cloture? And has the Senate changed its rules in the past in response to rampant obstructionism?
We’re still in the process of producing this episode (be sure to check the blog for updates on that front).