But Senate leaders agreed to bring the measure back after reaching a deal Thursday to consider about 20 amendments, split evenly between Democratic and Republican proposals.

elgeneralisimo on June 17, 2007 at 12:32 AM

To me, that was implied.

If they split the amnesty bill into the 12 (or so) amendments, wouldn’t it be easier for the good guys to call for a vote on each ‘amendment’, thereby killing the bill from the inside?

We need to vote ALL of these slimy individuals out of office and put some real people in and let the system work like it was originally meant to happen.

Just one man’s opinion, but at least think about it.

What a guy, that Reid.

Thats it folks.

Time to start dialing numbers…….and I mean with a vengeance……
Screw the Iraq War. Screw the Crime Rate. Screw Afghanistan.

Our President won’t rally behind those causes, but instead chooses to thrust this Amnesty down ou…

Is it time for a second American revolution?

Let me go get my lootin’ sacks ready.

More like bend over…

I thought that was what he meant…

“Filling the Tree” is, in it’s normal usage, a parliamentary step that the Majority Leader would use to prevent certain 1st degree amendments from being further amended themselves. You wouldn’t use the “division” process to “fill the tree”, you would just offer amendments in an order that would block the other side from offering amendments to the original amendment. Further, an amendment on a “filled” tree can be set aside so that another may be considered out of sequence.

By “dividing” the amendment, you can’t do the latter point. Once an amendment is divided, all the newly divided amendments have to be considered in order before any other amendment can come up. So if Reid has his amendment divided into 20+ subunits, all 20+ subunits have to be considered, in order, before any other amendment can come into play.

While both techniques can be used to block opposition amendments, doing so by division is much more effective because of this “divided amendments considered in order” rule. It’s also virtually unprecidented for the Majority party to do it, because it locks Members of the Majority party out of the amendment process, effectively treating in this case Democratic Senators as if they are Minority members. In a sense, the Senate is adopting a de facto House rule to screw their own members as Opposition Dems will have as few rights under the “division” as Minority GOP members in the house would have in fighting a Pelosi bill.

A fitting conclusion, if true. Open wide:

More like bend over…

I remember a time when Democrats Filibustered to prevent a constitutional vote. Actually, they Filibustered quite a few of those votes. Why don’t the Republicans who are against this bill do the same thing. There are enough to prevent an end to it.

Because cloture cuts off filibusters.

Prior to, i think, 1964-65, invoking cloture required 67 votes. The Senate later changed it’s rules to require only 60 votes to invoke cloture.

As a result, it is much easier now to cut off a filibuster than it used to be. Regrettably, many of the GOP’ers who voted against cloture last time are likely to flip (Kyl, Lott, Craig, McConnell etc). Any senator who attempted to filibuster it would need 41 votes in his back pocket to sustain the filibuster, and those votes may simply not be there.

The speakers were on point and had good messages. There were several cops there and I don’t know if that’s standard or if they were expecting more people. A few college-aged guys from California wandered over to check it out, as well as other passersby, and they were very nicely told what we were doing there and why it was important. At least word is getting out to those who already don’t know how catastrophic this amnesty could turn out for America.

Mojave Mark is right though…time to dial the phone and keep the emails going! Make sure your congresspeople know that any support they throw towards this will mark their last term in our Senate or House.

There is something very wrong with this situation.

They fail to realize how much we loathe them with/after this. The princes (and few princesses) from both sides need to be thrown out!

Ex. Interview of Bill O’ of St. McCain “…….illegal…broke the law….” McCain just stares impatiently, thinking “you idiot, who do you think you are to even question me?, then says “…yes, but it will take 13 years…bla, bla, bla”. Both him and Bill O’ completely ignore the #1 problem, the hypermagnet which are the employers who enable this invasion, with the tacit accomplice the government is – all of it!

FIRE POLITICAL PIMPS.

(If only their pensions could also be revoked -for malfeasance and breaking their oaths to defend the Constitution and the nation.)