filibuster The use of delaying tactics to block legislation is called a filibuster. The expression, from a Dutch word meaning “pirate,” became popular in the 1850s when American adventurers went filibustering around the Caribbean, trying to overthrow governments and seize power for themselves. The word was soon applied to Congress, where it was used to describe roguish efforts to seize the floor and prevent the majority from acting.
Even in the 1st Congress, minority members delivered long speeches and used the rules to obstruct legislation they opposed. At first, representatives as well as senators could filibuster, but as the House grew larger, it tightened its rules on how long individuals could speak. The Senate, which had fewer members, retained the right of unlimited debate. Senators felt it important that every member have the ability to speak for as long as necessary on any issue.
One of the Senate's first organized filibusters took place in 1841, when the Democratic minority sought to prevent action on a bank bill promoted by Henry Clay (Whig–Kentucky). After many days of speeches and delaying maneuvers, Clay threatened to change the Senate's rules to permit the majority to act. But Thomas Hart Benton (Democrat–Missouri) angrily accused Clay of trying to “stifle debate,” and John C. Calhoun (Democrat–South Carolina) denounced any attempt “to infringe the right of speech.” Clay retreated and conceded defeat.
Cloture
Until 1917 the Senate had no way to cut off debate. At the urging of President Woodrow Wilson, the Senate adopted a rule that permitted a two-thirds vote of the Senate to end debate. In 1919 the Senate invoked cloture for the first time to shut off a filibuster against the Treaty of Versailles. But cloture proved difficult to achieve and filibusters flourished, especially during lame-duck sessions, which take place between the November election and the beginning of the next Congress. During these sessions, many members would be leaving Congress shortly and were therefore easily influenced by special interests.
With only days left in the session, any member could disrupt business by filibustering or even threatening to filibuster. For this reason, Senator George Norris (Republican–Nebraska) sponsored the 20th Amendment to the Constitution, ratified in 1933, which effectively ended lame-duck filibustering by moving the opening of Congress from December of the following year back to January of that year so that lame ducks would have much less time to serve after they had been replaced by election. Since then, Congress has rarely met during the months between a November election and the convening of a new Congress on January 3.
Famous filibusters
During the 1930s, Senator Huey P. Long (Democrat–Louisiana) frequently filibustered against bills that he thought gave away too much to the wealthy. Long frustrated the Senate and entertained the nation by reciting Shakespeare, the Bible, and recipes for “pot-likker” (a Southern dish of boiled roots or greens whose liquid is used for dipping cornbread in) for hours on the Senate floor. He once held the floor for 15 hours. The longest individual speech was delivered by J. Strom Thurmond (Democrat/Republican–South Carolina), when he filibustered for 24 hours and 18 minutes against the Civil Rights Act of 1957.
More commonly, groups of senators conduct filibusters by working in teams to hold the floor for days and weeks. They will object to unanimous consent agreements, force the previous day's journal entry to be read aloud, suggest the absence of a quorum (the minimum attendance to conduct business), and otherwise insist that all the rules be observed as a means of slowing down business and wearing out the majority. For many years, Southern senators were especially skillful in filibustering against civil rights legislation. Not until 1964 was the Senate able to invoke cloture against an anti–civil rights filibuster. In 1975, the Senate reduced the number of senators needed to invoke cloture from two-thirds to three-fifths.
Absences and arrests
Along with making long-winded speeches, another favorite device of filibustering senators is simply to absent themselves from the chamber. If the minority party does not answer quorum calls, then the majority has to stay near the chamber at all times, day or night, to establish a quorum and keep business moving. At such times, the Senate majority leader will order that the sergeant at arms arrest absent senators. Deputy sergeants at arms go to the absent senators' offices and homes to accompany them to the chamber, and on occasion they have even physically carried senators in the door.
The Senate tolerates filibusters as a necessary evil. The ability to filibuster makes every senator, even the most junior member of the minority party, an important force in Senate proceedings. Even more important, contrary to the general belief that in a democracy the majority should rule, the filibuster offers a defense of the minority's rights and opinions.
See also Cloture; Debates, congressional; Lame-duck sessions of Congress
Sources
Sarah A. Binder and Steven S. Smith. Politics or Principle? Filibustering in the United States Senate (Washington, D.C.: Brookings Institution, 1996).
How to cite this entry:
"filibuster" The Oxford Guide to the United States Government. John J. Patrick, Richard M. Pious, and Donald A. Ritchie. Oxford University Press, 2001. Oxford Reference Online. Oxford University Press. 15 November 2011
Famous filibusters
During the 1930s, Senator Huey P. Long (Democrat–Louisiana) frequently filibustered against bills that he thought gave away too much to the wealthy. Long frustrated the Senate and entertained the nation by reciting Shakespeare, the Bible, and recipes for “pot-likker” (a Southern dish of boiled roots or greens whose liquid is used for dipping cornbread in) for hours on the Senate floor. He once held the floor for 15 hours. The longest individual speech was delivered by J. Strom Thurmond (Democrat/Republican–South Carolina), when he filibustered for 24 hours and 18 minutes against the Civil Rights Act of 1957.
More commonly, groups of senators conduct filibusters by working in teams to hold the floor for days and weeks. They will object to unanimous consent agreements, force the previous day's journal entry to be read aloud, suggest the absence of a quorum (the minimum attendance to conduct business), and otherwise insist that all the rules be observed as a means of slowing down business and wearing out the majority. For many years, Southern senators were especially skillful in filibustering against civil rights legislation. Not until 1964 was the Senate able to invoke cloture against an anti–civil rights filibuster. In 1975, the Senate reduced the number of senators needed to invoke cloture from two-thirds to three-fifths.
Absences and arrests
Along with making long-winded speeches, another favorite device of filibustering senators is simply to absent themselves from the chamber. If the minority party does not answer quorum calls, then the majority has to stay near the chamber at all times, day or night, to establish a quorum and keep business moving. At such times, the Senate majority leader will order that the sergeant at arms arrest absent senators. Deputy sergeants at arms go to the absent senators' offices and homes to accompany them to the chamber, and on occasion they have even physically carried senators in the door.
The Senate tolerates filibusters as a necessary evil. The ability to filibuster makes every senator, even the most junior member of the minority party, an important force in Senate proceedings. Even more important, contrary to the general belief that in a democracy the majority should rule, the filibuster offers a defense of the minority's rights and opinions.
See also Cloture; Debates, congressional; Lame-duck sessions of Congress
Sources
Sarah A. Binder and Steven S. Smith. Politics or Principle? Filibustering in the United States Senate (Washington, D.C.: Brookings Institution, 1996).
How to cite this entry:
"filibuster" The Oxford Guide to the United States Government. John J. Patrick, Richard M. Pious, and Donald A. Ritchie. Oxford University Press, 2001. Oxford Reference Online. Oxford University Press. 15 November 2011
