페이지 이미지
PDF
ePub

Such a motion would have been successful in 9 out of the 22 votes on cloture since 1917, whereas existing rules caused only 4 of these cloture motions to succeed, the last 1 in 1927, 30 years ago.

The principal sufferers from the failure of cloture have been the civil-rights bills.

FEPC, anti-lynching and anti-poll-tax bills have gone down under filibusters.

Other legislation, with some exceptions, no longer major issues, has managed to be passed some time although delayed by filibusters.

Civil-rights bills have failed consistently, however, for that reason. It is important to emphasize that the fact that a majority of the Senate was for such bills did not enable it to act.

I believe it is an inherent and fundamental weakness of our whole governmental system that a small minority can paralyze a majority for action on the protection of vital constitutional rights for millions of Americans in this way.

The most complete debate and deliberation is not in question. This will be provided for under any rule change which is likely to pass. What is in question is the mere pretense of debate for the purpose of blocking action, which is an affront to the Senate and to the country.

I will expect witnesses to address themselves to the subject of the expectation of any action on civil-rights measures unless rule XXII is changed.

Also I will do my best to hold the hearings within a reasonable compass of time and to prevent a filibuster within the committee which is seeking to deal with filibusters.

I point out that the hearings on this subject in 1947 took 4 days, in 1949 6 days, and in 1951 4 days again. Hence no set of hearings has exceeded 6 separate days of hearings.

I believe it fully within the authority of this subcommittee to see that the hearings do not get out of hand.

Now Mr. Chairman, I would like also I notice the Chair has this analysis of all the bills

Senator TALMADGE. We will put that in the record.

Senator JAVITS. If the Chair would and then I would like to put something in the record.

Senator TALMADGE. I think at the outset we should insert in the record the comparative analysis of the various resolutions pending before the committee for study which has been prepared by the staff of the Committee on Rules and Administration.

We will insert that in the record as well as the full text of each pending resolution.

(The comparative analysis of S. Res. 17, S. Res. 19, S. Res. 21, S. Res. 28, S. Res. 29, S. Res. 30, and S. Res. 32, of the 85th Congress, 1st session, and the texts of those resolutions, and that of S. Res. 171-subsequently referred to the committee, are as follows:)

[blocks in formation]

PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO RULE XXII

(RELATING TO CLOTURE)

A Comparative Analysis of S. Res. 17, S. Res. 19, S. Res. 21,
S. Res. 28, S. Res. 29, S. Res. 30, and S. Res. 32, of

the Eighty-fifth Congress, First Session

STAFF STUDY

OF THE

COMMITTEE ON
RULES AND ADMINISTRATION

UNITED STATES SENATE

Printed for the use of the Committee on Rules and Administration

UNITED STATES
GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE

WASHINGTON : 1957

PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO RULE XXII

(RELATING TO CLOTURE)

During the 85th Congress, 1st session (up to February 11, 1957), the following proposals to amend standing rule XXII, relating to cloture, have been referred to the Committee on Rules and Administration for consideration:

Resolution No.

Date of refer

ence to committee

Sponsor and cosponsors

[blocks in formation]

Mr. Douglas, Mr. Ives, Mr. Murray, Mr. Humphrey, Mr. Morse,

Mr. Hennings, Mr. Chavez, Mr. Jackson, Mr. Potter, Mr. Mc-
Namara, Mr. Case of New Jersey, Mr. Neuberger, Mr. Carroll,

Mr. Clark, Mr. Javits.
Mr. Case of South Dakota.
Mr. Morse.
Mr. Ives.
Mr. Humphrey, Mr. Anderson, Mr. Clark, Mr. Douglas.
Mr. Knowland, Mr. Joh on of Texas, Mr. Saltonstall, Mr. Bridges,

Mr. Dirksen, Mr. Smith of New Jersey, Mr. Thye, Mr. Barrett,
Mr. Beall, Mr. Cotton, Mr. Hruska, Mr. Payne, Mr. Purtell,
Mr. Revercomb, Mr. Schoeppel, Mr. Watkins, Mr. Bricker, Mr.
Bennett, Mr. Mundt, Mr. Capehart, Mr. Kennedy, Mr. Mans-
field, Mr. Williams, Mr. Monroney, Mr. Kerr, Mr. Church, Mr.
Bible, Mr. O'Mahoney, Mr. Hayden, Mr. Gore, Mr. Jenner, Mr.
Butler, Mrs. Smith of Maine, Mr. Carlson, Mr, Martin of Penn-
sylvania, Mr. Anderson, Mr. Frear, Mr. Green, Mr. Case of South

Dakota.
Mr. Bush.

[blocks in formation]

Rule XXII consists of three sections. For the pu

For the purposes of this analysis the text of the present rule is given section by section with the portions intended to be deleted or substituted for in italic. The changes proposed by the respective resolutions are indicated opposite the section or paragraph of rule XXII to which they would apply.

It should be noted that no change in section 1 of rule XXII is contemplated by any of the resolutions considered. Also, two proposals are included which would not effect any change in rule XXII. In addition to amending that rule, Senate Resolution 19 would provide

That the Senate do now adopt as its rules for the Eighty-
fifth Congress the rules which prevailed during the Eighty-
fourth Congress

*

5

and Senate Resolution 30 would add to rule XXXII the following new section:

2. The rules of the Senate shall continue from one Congress to the next Congress unless they are changed as provided in

these rules. The analysis of the proposed amendments to rule XXII follows:

Comparative analysis of proposed amendments to Rule XXII (relating to

cloture)

[graphic][subsumed][subsumed][ocr errors][subsumed][subsumed][ocr errors][ocr errors][ocr errors][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][merged small]
« 이전계속 »