PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Committee on Rules and Administration. Hearings held.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Mar 4, 2010
Amends Rule VIII (Order of Business) of the Standing Rules of the Senate to provide that all motions to proceed to the consideration of any matter shall be determined without debate, except motions to proceed to a proposal to change the Standing Rules.
Amends Rule XXII (Precedence of Motions) of the Standing Rules of the Senate to: (1) provide that Senators may by a two-thirds vote agree to reduce the time for consideration of a motion to close debate (cloture); (2) allow a majority vote for invoking cloture (currently, 60 votes required) unless 41 Senators vote against cloture; and (3) set forth a new procedure for closing debate after 3 failed attempts by requiring 45 Senators to vote against closing debate, unless at least 1 of the Senators voting against closing debate caucuses with the party of the Majority Leader (in which case the threshold remains 41 votes to continue debate).
Increases the threshold vote for continuing debate from 41 to 45 if 1 member of the Majority votes to continue debate and 3 members caucusing with the Minority Leader vote to close debate.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Adds Rule XLV (Process for Holds) to the Standing Rules of the Senate to require any Senator who provides notice of an intention to object to proceeding to a motion or matter to disclose such objection in the Congressional Record not later than two session days after the date of such notice. Allows the Senate to continue to recognize such objection if it is raised at least by one Senator who caucuses with the party of the Majority Leader and one Senator who causes with the party of the Minority Leader.
Prohibits the recognition of a particular objection to a nomination for more than 30 days, but allows a second objection to a nomination beyond such 30-day limit if it is raised by at least 1 Senator who caucuses with the party of the Majority Leader and at least 1 Senator who caucuses with the party of the Minority Leader, neither of whom raised the first objection.
People & committees
Sen. Bennet, Michael F. [D-CO] · D–CO
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Committee on Rules and Administration. Hearings held.
Referred to the Committee on Rules and Administration. (text of measure as introduced: CR S1184-1185)
Introduced in Senate
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Jan 14, 2025. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Analyze S.Res.440 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
Examine S.Res.440 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
Examine S.Res.440 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
Examine S.Res.440 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.