I am kind of too scared to ask here, but what did it actually achieve?

  • A_Wild_Zeus_Chase@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    2 days ago

    Nothing by itself. But if it can encourage other senators to filibuster, and more importantly, to organize to filibuster together , the impact could be paralyzing.

    To take an obvious example, for half a century, from say 1910 to 1964-5, there were more than enough votes in the US senate to enact civil rights legislation, as southerners only made up 22 or so of the 96-100 senators then (no Hawaii or Alaska for part of that).

    But that legislation never happened. And the reason why is it didn’t was that southern senators were able to filibuster so effectively that the legislation could never be brought to the floor.

    The it’s not that the votes on that specific bill weren’t there. It’s just that under the leadership of Sen Richard Russel of Georgia (who the “Russel Senate Office Building” is named after), the southern senators understood the way to block legislation was to filibuster not just the bill in question, but any law up that was so important economically that senators couldn’t afford to let it lapse.

    So they organized, filibustered key bills, set up “watches” where at least one senator had to be on the floor to defeat any quorum calls (which ends a filibuster, as you do not actually have to be talking to filibuster a bill), and filibustered not just votes on key bills, but even votes on motions to bring those bills out of committee to the floor.

    Obviously, the democrats now aren’t doing that. But they could. And by generating headlines by filibustering, he encourages other senators to do so, if only for popularity.