# What do senators talk about during a filibuster?
**URL:** https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-do-senators-talk-about-during-a-filibuster/159543
**Category:** Factual Questions
**Created:** [March 6, 2003, 6:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-do-senators-talk-about-during-a-filibuster/159543 "2003-03-06T18:29:41Z")
**Posts on this page:** 16
**Page:** 1
### Author:  [@Dignan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dignan)
#### Post date: [March 6, 2003, 6:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-do-senators-talk-about-during-a-filibuster/159543/1 "2003-03-06T18:29:41Z")
The recent filibuster to keep a Bush judicial nominee from a position got me thinking about this. What exactly do they talk about? Is this kind of stuff on C-SPAN? They can just talk about anything, but is there a place where I can read what they say? Do the senators just talk about stupid stuff and what kind of stupid stuff in particular?
The article I read didn’t mention anything that was said. The article did say that Strom Thurmond filibustered (?) for ~24 hours to keep the civil rights bill from passing; I can’t imagine he talked about that one bill for an entire day.
Any help?
---
### Author:  [@JerH](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JerH)
#### Post date: [March 6, 2003, 6:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-do-senators-talk-about-during-a-filibuster/159543/2 "2003-03-06T18:37:12Z")
They changed the rules in the 1970s, so that “filibustering” is no longer someone standing around on the floor, talking to prevent anything else from happening. Nowadays, it’s a more bureaucratic thing, where whatever issue is being filibustered is put aside but they can still do other stuff.
---
### Author:  [@slipster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/slipster)
#### Post date: [March 6, 2003, 7:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-do-senators-talk-about-during-a-filibuster/159543/3 "2003-03-06T19:09:30Z")
The Senate has very few rules limiting debate, so a senator is permitted to talk about pretty much anything he wants.
Huey Long once gave a lecture on making pot liquor.
Sometimes senators have read at length from a book, much as Jimmy Stewart did in Mr. Smith Goes to Washington; there is a scene where he reads from The New Testament in a hoarse voice.
While I cannot comment on rule changes made in the 1970s, the procedure today appears to be similar. Last week or the week before the National Public Radio show All Things Considered played a brief excerpt from Senator Robert Byrd’s recent contribution to the current filibuster. He was telling the pages in the room about how, as a boy, he first endeared himself to his future wife by sharing his bubble gum.
---
### Author:  [@slipster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/slipster)
#### Post date: [March 6, 2003, 7:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-do-senators-talk-about-during-a-filibuster/159543/4 "2003-03-06T19:14:44Z")
An additional thought:
The ability of a particularly eloquent (or merely long-winded) person to speak at length on a given subject can be staggering.
Clarence Darrow spoke for two days (that is, for as long as court was in session on two consecutive days), when arguing against the death penalty for Leopold and Loeb.
IIRC, Daniel Webster argued the government’s side in McCullough vs. Maryland for two days before the Supreme Court, and without notes. At present attorneys are limited to one hour.
---
### Author:  [@TeleTronOne](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TeleTronOne)
#### Post date: [March 6, 2003, 7:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-do-senators-talk-about-during-a-filibuster/159543/5 "2003-03-06T19:19:48Z")
> [@](#):
>
> \*Originally posted by Dignan \*
> [but is there a place where I can read what they say? \*\*
You might try [The Congressional Record](http://thomas.loc.gov/r108/r108.html)
---
### Author:  [@robby](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/robby)
#### Post date: [March 6, 2003, 7:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-do-senators-talk-about-during-a-filibuster/159543/6 "2003-03-06T19:20:48Z")
> [@](#):
>
> \*Originally posted by Dignan \*
> \*\*The article I read didn’t mention anything that was said. The article did say that Strom Thurmond filibustered (?) for ~24 hours to keep the civil rights bill from passing; I can’t imagine he talked about that one bill for an entire day.
>
> Any help? \*\*
Filibustering senators used to recite from telephone directories and cook books.
IIRC, Thurmond started by reciting the election laws of the 48 states.
The material did not have to relevant to the bill being filibustered.
---
### Author:  [@SpartanDC](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SpartanDC)
#### Post date: [March 6, 2003, 7:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-do-senators-talk-about-during-a-filibuster/159543/7 "2003-03-06T19:30:58Z")
It should be said though that, for the most part, senators do talk about the matter at hand. Though they certainly don’t have to, and old-style senators like Byrd will often talk about whatever they fancy. It’s actually those kind of moments that make the whole thing entertaining.
Sadly, the filibuster done by Jefferson Smith in “Mr. Smith Goes to Washington” isn’t possible anymore. Senate rules now allow a 3/5 majority of the chamber to invoke cloture, which limits all debate thereafter to 30 hours. Strom Thurmond is one of the reasons that happened: To stop one contrarian from blocking a bill that has WIDE support otherwise.
In fact, the Senate just failed to invoke cloture today on the debate cited in the OP. So the Democratic filibuster continues, though now mostly behind closed doors.
---
### Author:  [@Sofa\_King](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sofa_King)
#### Post date: [March 6, 2003, 7:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-do-senators-talk-about-during-a-filibuster/159543/8 "2003-03-06T19:42:37Z")
Actually, the informal [definition](http://www.senate.gov/reference/glossary_term/filibuster.htm) was expanded to include the “bureaucratic thing” to which **JerH** refers and which is being used to block the Estrada confirmation, but a Senator can still grab and hold control of the Senate floor for as long as he can stand. There are few rules as to what topics can or cannot be discussed. Jimmy Stewart’s filibuster in _Mr. Smith_ is a highly unusual case because he has no co-conspirators with which to continue the debate.
In the case of the Estrada filibuster, there are a number of aligned Senators who are handing off the floor to one another. For example, in the week before the President’s Day break, 80-something Sen. Robert Byrd snagged the floor and held it for an entire morning, delivering an impassioned (some might say “blustering”) speech (some might say “fulmination”) against the impending war on Iraq which spanned four pages in the abovementioned Congressional Record–well over five thousand words. He returned to related issues on the 12th _and_ the 13th of February. For awhile there, C-SPAN began to look like The Robert Byrd Show.
Incidentally, while Thurmond holds the record for his nearly day-long monologue blocking the Civil Rights Act, [it was Byrd](http://www.senate.gov/artandhistory/history/minute/Civil_Rights_Filibuster_Ended.htm) who wrapped up a fourteen-hour speech only to discover that the Democrats had assembled a cloture vote ending the nearly two-month long debate.
---
### Author:  [@Freddy\_the\_Pig](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Freddy_the_Pig)
#### Post date: [March 6, 2003, 8:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-do-senators-talk-about-during-a-filibuster/159543/9 "2003-03-06T20:33:40Z")
> [@](#):
>
> \*Originally posted by SNenc \*
> **Sadly, the filibuster done by Jefferson Smith in “Mr. Smith Goes to Washington” isn’t possible anymore. Senate rules now allow a 3/5 majority of the chamber to invoke cloture, which limits all debate thereafter to 30 hours. Strom Thurmond is one of the reasons that happened: To stop one contrarian from blocking a bill that has WIDE support otherwise.**
The cloture rule was instituted in 1918, in reaction to a 1917 filibuster which killed a widely supported bill to allow the Wilson administration to arm merchant ships on the eve of World War I. It provided for cloture by a 2/3 majority, which was changed to 3/5 in 1975.
However, _one Senator_ can still hold the floor indefinitely. A cloture motion cannot interrupt the speaker. This was the scenario presented in _Mr. Smith Goes to Washington_.
---
### Author:  [@friedo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/friedo)
#### Post date: [March 6, 2003, 8:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-do-senators-talk-about-during-a-filibuster/159543/10 "2003-03-06T20:41:58Z")
Isn’t it true that in order for that to happen, the lone Senator must continue talking indefinately, without sitting down or leaning on anything or touching another person?
---
### Author:  [@brianmelendez](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/brianmelendez)
#### Post date: [March 6, 2003, 9:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-do-senators-talk-about-during-a-filibuster/159543/11 "2003-03-06T21:23:08Z")
> [@](#):
>
> \*Originally posted by friedo \*
> \*\*Isn’t it true that in order for that to happen, the lone Senator must continue talking indefinately, without sitting down or leaning on anything or touching another person? \*\*
The Senate bills itself as the world’s greatest deliberative body, largely because of its tradition of unlimited debate–unlimited in time, and unlimited in topic. A senator may speak for as long as he or she wants, on any topic that he or she wants, as long as the senator holds the floor continuously–that is, he or she cannot leave the chamber, or take his or her seat, or pause. (Although the filibustering senator can manage a break by making certain motions, such as a quorum call, without relinquishing the floor. I don’t know about “without … touching another person.”) A filibuster takes maximum advantage of that tradition. For example, when southern senators opposed civil-rights legislation in the 1950s, they sometimes spoke around the clock. The filibuster prevents a vote on the question before the Senate, and blocks any other significant business from coming forward, so that no legislation or nomination can pass while a filibuster is underway. The filibuster usually continues until the other side, the senators who support the question being filibustered, agrees to a compromise or delay, or drops the matter in order to break the logjam.
---
### Author:  [@Sofa\_King](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sofa_King)
#### Post date: [March 6, 2003, 9:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-do-senators-talk-about-during-a-filibuster/159543/12 "2003-03-06T21:26:14Z")
_Said **friedo** :_
> [@](#):
>
> Isn’t it true that in order for that to happen, the lone Senator must continue talking indefinately, without sitting down or leaning on anything or touching another person?
I’m not so sure about that. It seems true that a Senator cannot sit down, because it would be construed as relinquishing control of the floor. But unless touching someone else is “conduct unbecoming” of a Senator, it’s not explicitly forbidden in the Rules. Since you paid for it, here is the [entire chapter on debate](http://rules.senate.gov/senaterules/rule19.htm):
> [@](#):
>
> Standing Rules of The Senate
> RULE XIX
>
> DEBATE
>
> 1. (a) When a Senator desires to speak, he shall rise and address the Presiding Officer, and shall not proceed until he is recognized, and the Presiding Officer shall recognize the Senator who shall first address him. No Senator shall interrupt another Senator in debate without his consent, and to obtain such consent he shall first address the Presiding Officer, and no Senator shall speak more than twice upon any one question in debate on the same legislative day without leave of the Senate, which shall be determined without debate.
>
> (b) At the conclusion of the morning hour at the beginning of a new legislative day or after the unfinished business or any pending business has first been laid before the Senate on any calendar day, and until after the duration of three hours of actual session after such business is laid down except as determined to the contrary by unanimous consent or on motion without debate, all debate shall be germane and confined to the specific question then pending before the Senate.
>
> 1. No Senator in debate shall, directly or indirectly, by any form of words impute to another Senator or to other Senators any conduct or motive unworthy or unbecoming a Senator.
>
> 2. No Senator in debate shall refer offensively to any State of the Union.
>
> 3. If any Senator, in speaking or otherwise, in the opinion of the Presiding Officer transgress the rules of the Senate the Presiding Officer shall, either on his own motion or at the request of any other Senator, call him to order; and when a Senator shall be called to order he shall take his seat, and may not proceed without leave of the Senate, which, if granted, shall be upon motion that he be allowed to proceed in order, which motion shall be determined without debate. Any Senator directed by the Presiding Officer to take his seat, and any Senator requesting the Presiding Officer to require a Senator to take his seat, may appeal from the ruling of the Chair, which appeal shall be open to debate.
>
> 4. If a Senator be called to order for words spoken in debate, upon the demand of the Senator or of any other Senator, the exceptionable words shall be taken down in writing, and read at the table for the information of the Senate.
>
> 5. Whenever confusion arises in the Chamber or the galleries, or demonstrations of approval or disapproval are indulged in by the occupants of the galleries, it shall be the duty of the Chair to enforce order on his own initiative and without any point of order being made by a Senator.
>
> 6. No Senator shall introduce to or bring to the attention of the Senate during its sessions any occupant in the galleries of the Senate. No motion to suspend this rule shall be in order, nor may the Presiding Officer entertain any request to suspend it by unanimous consent.
>
> 7. Former Presidents of the United States shall be entitled to address the Senate upon appropriate notice to the Presiding Officer who shall thereupon make the necessary arrangements.
It seems the only way to get a Senator to shut up is to either trick him into taking his seat or to call him to order for either a) talking shit about another Senator; b) talking shit about a State; or c) directing the attention of the Senate to the visitors in the galleries.
That last item brings up an interesting possibility for breaking a filibuster… “And as you can see here on page 432 of _Atlas Shrugged_–huh? Just what in the hell is that couple doing up there?”
---
### Author:  [@cletus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/cletus)
#### Post date: [April 11, 2003, 6:24am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-do-senators-talk-about-during-a-filibuster/159543/13 "2003-04-11T06:24:56Z")
Does anyone know what the record is for the longest filibuster performed by one man? Also, does that mean no one is allowed to leave until the filibuster is over, even if it takes 24 or 48 hours (or more)?
---
### Author:  [@Cardinal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cardinal)
#### Post date: [April 11, 2003, 9:19am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-do-senators-talk-about-during-a-filibuster/159543/14 "2003-04-11T09:19:21Z")
I’m almost positive that pretty much no one is there during a filibuster. There’s no real debate going on, and the Senate is hardly ever full, anyway.
We get this idea that it’s full from seeing the president deliver State of the Union speeches. It’s not. Almost all of the congressional work is done off the floor. Even when there’s a vote, they have a time frame to work in. They come in, swipe their official “I’m a senator” card, IIRC, and lodge a vote. Then they probably leave.
---
### Author:  [@brianmelendez](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/brianmelendez)
#### Post date: [April 11, 2003, 9:48am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-do-senators-talk-about-during-a-filibuster/159543/15 "2003-04-11T09:48:34Z")
> [@](#):
>
> \*Originally posted by cletus \*
> **Does anyone know what the record is for the longest filibuster performed by one man?**
From the U.S. Senate website (don’t let the caption mislead you):
> [@](#):
>
> **April 24-25, 1953
> [Wayne Morse Sets Filibuster Record](http://www.senate.gov/artandhistory/history/minute/Wayne_Morse_Sets_Filibuster_Record.htm)**
>
> His admirers called him “The Tiger of the Senate.” His many enemies, including five presidents, called him a lot worse. Today he is remembered as a gifted lawmaker and principled maverick who thrived on controversy.
>
> Wayne Morse was born in Wisconsin in 1900. In his early years, he fell under the influence of that state’s fiery progressive senator, Robert M. La Follette, a stem-winding orator and champion of family farmers and the laboring poor. In the 1930s, Morse became the nation’s youngest law school dean and a skilled labor arbitrator. In 1944, despite his New Deal sympathies, he won election as a Republican to an Oregon U.S. Senate seat.
>
> During the 1952 presidential campaign, Morse broke ranks with Republican leaders over the party’s platform and Dwight Eisenhower’s choice of Richard Nixon as his running mate. Claiming the Republican party had left him, Morse announced his switch to Independent status. In January 1953, Morse arrived at the opening session of the Eighty-third Congress with a folding chair and a comment. “Since I haven’t been given any seat in the new Senate, I decided to bring my own.” Although he was placed on the majority Republican side, that party’s caucus stripped him of his choice committee assignments.
>
> Against this backdrop, Wayne Morse rose on the Senate floor on April 24, 1953. Described as “a lean trim man, with a clipped mustache, sharp nose, and bushy black eyebrows,” he begin a filibuster against Tidelands Oil legislation. When he concluded after twenty-two hours and twenty-six minutes, he had broken the eighteen-hour record set in 1908 by his mentor, Robert La Follette. Morse kept that distinction until 1957, when _Strom Thurmond logged the current record of twenty-four hours and eighteen minutes._
(Emphasis added.) For more information about Senator Thurmond’s filibuster, google “longest filibuster.” He was speaking against the Civil Rights Act of 1957, which is perhaps why the Senate’s website highlights Morse’s earlier, shorter filibuster and barely mentions Thurmond’s record-setting performance.
---
### Author:  [@CalMeacham](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CalMeacham)
#### Post date: [April 11, 2003, 11:06am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-do-senators-talk-about-during-a-filibuster/159543/16 "2003-04-11T11:06:23Z")
Waaaaaaay back, when I was in high school, I wrote a satiric piece about the long-departed “Washingtonian Empire” , in which I described the _filibuster_ as “a horrible torture by which a senator was made to stand for as long as he spoke.”