Standing Order and Rulemaking Statute: Possible Alternatives to the âNuclear Optionâ? (CRS Report for Congress)
Premium Purchase PDF for $24.95 (11 pages)
add to cart or
subscribe for unlimited access
Pro Premium subscribers have free access to our full library of CRS reports.
Subscribe today, or
request a demo to learn more.
| Release Date |
April 20, 2005 |
| Report Number |
RL32874 |
| Report Type |
Report |
| Authors |
Christopher M. Davis, Government and Finance Division |
| Source Agency |
Congressional Research Service |
Summary:
Concern over the Senate's inability to reach a vote on certain pending nominations has
led some
Senators to express an interest in amending or bypassing the supermajority requirement to limit
consideration now required by Senate rules. Such an approach to ending filibusters, dubbed the
ânuclear' or âconstitutional' parliamentary option, might be
accomplished in several ways, some of
which, opponents argue, could violate Senate rules or precedents.
It might also be possible to institute new consideration limits on nominations by establishing
a new standing order or by statutory provisions having the force of rules. Action in either of these
forms might have advantages over both standing rule amendments and precedential action, but might
also present special obstacles.
The purpose of this report is to examine advantages and disadvantages of limiting Senate
consideration by these forms.
This report will be updated as needed.
