Mixing
What is the US senate mechanism for members to respond to/challenge each other during debate?
Clash Royale CLAN TAG#URR8PPP
up vote
3
down vote
favorite
I have been following Dutch politics for a while now, and what makes debates interesting is interruptions; When somebody doesn't agree with what a speaker is saying they can step up to the microphone and challenge what is being said, or ask questions to the speaker.
I have also been following US politics lately, and was watching a senate debate (as I've done a few times before). It suddenly struck me that there is nobody interrupting the speaker to ask questions or challenge what they are saying.
It seems that similar interruptions are not allowed in the US senate? I tried to find out whether that is true, but since the term "interruptions" is quite broad I've not had any success with google (I might be using the wrong term).
That leads me to my questions; Is there an alternative mechanism in the US senate that allows members to respond to/challenge each other? If so, what is it? Or otherwise, is there a specific reason why not?
I have also read some other questions on this site, including:
- Are Senators not allowed to criticize each other on the Senate floor?
But that seems to be about rules against personal attacks, not factual criticism.
united-states senate senate-rules debate
asked 3 hours ago
Jorn Vernee
1428
add a comment |Â
up vote
3
down vote
favorite
I have been following Dutch politics for a while now, and what makes debates interesting is interruptions; When somebody doesn't agree with what a speaker is saying they can step up to the microphone and challenge what is being said, or ask questions to the speaker.
I have also been following US politics lately, and was watching a senate debate (as I've done a few times before). It suddenly struck me that there is nobody interrupting the speaker to ask questions or challenge what they are saying.
It seems that similar interruptions are not allowed in the US senate? I tried to find out whether that is true, but since the term "interruptions" is quite broad I've not had any success with google (I might be using the wrong term).
That leads me to my questions; Is there an alternative mechanism in the US senate that allows members to respond to/challenge each other? If so, what is it? Or otherwise, is there a specific reason why not?
I have also read some other questions on this site, including:
- Are Senators not allowed to criticize each other on the Senate floor?
But that seems to be about rules against personal attacks, not factual criticism.
united-states senate senate-rules debate
asked 3 hours ago
Jorn Vernee
1428
add a comment |Â
up vote
3
down vote
favorite
up vote
3
down vote
favorite
I have been following Dutch politics for a while now, and what makes debates interesting is interruptions; When somebody doesn't agree with what a speaker is saying they can step up to the microphone and challenge what is being said, or ask questions to the speaker.
I have also been following US politics lately, and was watching a senate debate (as I've done a few times before). It suddenly struck me that there is nobody interrupting the speaker to ask questions or challenge what they are saying.
It seems that similar interruptions are not allowed in the US senate? I tried to find out whether that is true, but since the term "interruptions" is quite broad I've not had any success with google (I might be using the wrong term).
That leads me to my questions; Is there an alternative mechanism in the US senate that allows members to respond to/challenge each other? If so, what is it? Or otherwise, is there a specific reason why not?
I have also read some other questions on this site, including:
- Are Senators not allowed to criticize each other on the Senate floor?
But that seems to be about rules against personal attacks, not factual criticism.
united-states senate senate-rules debate
asked 3 hours ago
Jorn Vernee
1428
I have been following Dutch politics for a while now, and what makes debates interesting is interruptions; When somebody doesn't agree with what a speaker is saying they can step up to the microphone and challenge what is being said, or ask questions to the speaker.
I have also been following US politics lately, and was watching a senate debate (as I've done a few times before). It suddenly struck me that there is nobody interrupting the speaker to ask questions or challenge what they are saying.
It seems that similar interruptions are not allowed in the US senate? I tried to find out whether that is true, but since the term "interruptions" is quite broad I've not had any success with google (I might be using the wrong term).
That leads me to my questions; Is there an alternative mechanism in the US senate that allows members to respond to/challenge each other? If so, what is it? Or otherwise, is there a specific reason why not?
I have also read some other questions on this site, including:
- Are Senators not allowed to criticize each other on the Senate floor?
But that seems to be about rules against personal attacks, not factual criticism.
united-states senate senate-rules debate
united-states senate senate-rules debate
asked 3 hours ago
Jorn Vernee
1428
asked 3 hours ago
Jorn Vernee
1428
edited 3 hours ago
asked 3 hours ago
Jorn Vernee
1428
asked 3 hours ago
Jorn Vernee
1428
asked 3 hours ago
Jorn Vernee
1428
1428
add a comment |Â
add a comment |Â
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
up vote
3
down vote
accepted
From the Rules of the Senate:
- (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.
So the process of interrupting is to ask the presiding officer to ask the speaker to allow the interrupter to speak. And the speaker can say no. Also, if someone does speak, that person loses the opportunity to speak later on that same day without special dispensation. So Senators may want to be careful about doing so. It may be better to wait until their turn and provide any rebuttal at that time.
answered 1 hour ago
Brythan
62k7123215
Thinking more about this, I'd like some clarification; Is a US senate interruption just a single chance for the interrupter to speak, or is there a chance for back and forth between the speaker and interrupter? (this doesn't seem to be mentioned in the rules you've linked)
– Jorn Vernee
1 hour ago
1
The process is not designed for a back and forth. It is designed for a series of speeches. They could engage in a back and forth, but it would involve a lot of "I cede the floor to ..." And since such ceding is voluntary, they wouldn't necessarily have to cede back (although the first speaker might eventually get the remaining time back). This is debate like a debate team debates rather than how two individuals would debate. There will seldom be a back and forth because the rules don't encourage it.
– Brythan
38 mins ago
Ok, thanks for the response. I kinda miss the back and forth when watching US debates. The Dutch ones seem to be designed around that, and the interesting part is that it forces people to go off script and think of a response on the fly. Also, the time limit for speakers is a lot shorter, usually only around 3-4 minutes (which is paused during an interruption).
– Jorn Vernee
28 mins ago
add a comment |Â
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
up vote
3
down vote
accepted
From the Rules of the Senate:
- (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.
So the process of interrupting is to ask the presiding officer to ask the speaker to allow the interrupter to speak. And the speaker can say no. Also, if someone does speak, that person loses the opportunity to speak later on that same day without special dispensation. So Senators may want to be careful about doing so. It may be better to wait until their turn and provide any rebuttal at that time.
answered 1 hour ago
Brythan
62k7123215
Thinking more about this, I'd like some clarification; Is a US senate interruption just a single chance for the interrupter to speak, or is there a chance for back and forth between the speaker and interrupter? (this doesn't seem to be mentioned in the rules you've linked)
– Jorn Vernee
1 hour ago
1
The process is not designed for a back and forth. It is designed for a series of speeches. They could engage in a back and forth, but it would involve a lot of "I cede the floor to ..." And since such ceding is voluntary, they wouldn't necessarily have to cede back (although the first speaker might eventually get the remaining time back). This is debate like a debate team debates rather than how two individuals would debate. There will seldom be a back and forth because the rules don't encourage it.
– Brythan
38 mins ago
Ok, thanks for the response. I kinda miss the back and forth when watching US debates. The Dutch ones seem to be designed around that, and the interesting part is that it forces people to go off script and think of a response on the fly. Also, the time limit for speakers is a lot shorter, usually only around 3-4 minutes (which is paused during an interruption).
– Jorn Vernee
28 mins ago
add a comment |Â
up vote
3
down vote
accepted
From the Rules of the Senate:
- (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.
So the process of interrupting is to ask the presiding officer to ask the speaker to allow the interrupter to speak. And the speaker can say no. Also, if someone does speak, that person loses the opportunity to speak later on that same day without special dispensation. So Senators may want to be careful about doing so. It may be better to wait until their turn and provide any rebuttal at that time.
answered 1 hour ago
Brythan
62k7123215
Thinking more about this, I'd like some clarification; Is a US senate interruption just a single chance for the interrupter to speak, or is there a chance for back and forth between the speaker and interrupter? (this doesn't seem to be mentioned in the rules you've linked)
– Jorn Vernee
1 hour ago
1
The process is not designed for a back and forth. It is designed for a series of speeches. They could engage in a back and forth, but it would involve a lot of "I cede the floor to ..." And since such ceding is voluntary, they wouldn't necessarily have to cede back (although the first speaker might eventually get the remaining time back). This is debate like a debate team debates rather than how two individuals would debate. There will seldom be a back and forth because the rules don't encourage it.
– Brythan
38 mins ago
Ok, thanks for the response. I kinda miss the back and forth when watching US debates. The Dutch ones seem to be designed around that, and the interesting part is that it forces people to go off script and think of a response on the fly. Also, the time limit for speakers is a lot shorter, usually only around 3-4 minutes (which is paused during an interruption).
– Jorn Vernee
28 mins ago
add a comment |Â
up vote
3
down vote
accepted
up vote
3
down vote
accepted
From the Rules of the Senate:
- (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.
So the process of interrupting is to ask the presiding officer to ask the speaker to allow the interrupter to speak. And the speaker can say no. Also, if someone does speak, that person loses the opportunity to speak later on that same day without special dispensation. So Senators may want to be careful about doing so. It may be better to wait until their turn and provide any rebuttal at that time.
answered 1 hour ago
Brythan
62k7123215
From the Rules of the Senate:
- (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.
So the process of interrupting is to ask the presiding officer to ask the speaker to allow the interrupter to speak. And the speaker can say no. Also, if someone does speak, that person loses the opportunity to speak later on that same day without special dispensation. So Senators may want to be careful about doing so. It may be better to wait until their turn and provide any rebuttal at that time.
answered 1 hour ago
Brythan
62k7123215
answered 1 hour ago
Brythan
62k7123215
answered 1 hour ago
Brythan
62k7123215
answered 1 hour ago
Brythan
62k7123215
62k7123215
Thinking more about this, I'd like some clarification; Is a US senate interruption just a single chance for the interrupter to speak, or is there a chance for back and forth between the speaker and interrupter? (this doesn't seem to be mentioned in the rules you've linked)
– Jorn Vernee
1 hour ago
1
The process is not designed for a back and forth. It is designed for a series of speeches. They could engage in a back and forth, but it would involve a lot of "I cede the floor to ..." And since such ceding is voluntary, they wouldn't necessarily have to cede back (although the first speaker might eventually get the remaining time back). This is debate like a debate team debates rather than how two individuals would debate. There will seldom be a back and forth because the rules don't encourage it.
– Brythan
38 mins ago
Ok, thanks for the response. I kinda miss the back and forth when watching US debates. The Dutch ones seem to be designed around that, and the interesting part is that it forces people to go off script and think of a response on the fly. Also, the time limit for speakers is a lot shorter, usually only around 3-4 minutes (which is paused during an interruption).
– Jorn Vernee
28 mins ago
add a comment |Â
Thinking more about this, I'd like some clarification; Is a US senate interruption just a single chance for the interrupter to speak, or is there a chance for back and forth between the speaker and interrupter? (this doesn't seem to be mentioned in the rules you've linked)
– Jorn Vernee
1 hour ago
1
The process is not designed for a back and forth. It is designed for a series of speeches. They could engage in a back and forth, but it would involve a lot of "I cede the floor to ..." And since such ceding is voluntary, they wouldn't necessarily have to cede back (although the first speaker might eventually get the remaining time back). This is debate like a debate team debates rather than how two individuals would debate. There will seldom be a back and forth because the rules don't encourage it.
– Brythan
38 mins ago
Ok, thanks for the response. I kinda miss the back and forth when watching US debates. The Dutch ones seem to be designed around that, and the interesting part is that it forces people to go off script and think of a response on the fly. Also, the time limit for speakers is a lot shorter, usually only around 3-4 minutes (which is paused during an interruption).
– Jorn Vernee
28 mins ago
Thinking more about this, I'd like some clarification; Is a US senate interruption just a single chance for the interrupter to speak, or is there a chance for back and forth between the speaker and interrupter? (this doesn't seem to be mentioned in the rules you've linked)
– Jorn Vernee
1 hour ago
Thinking more about this, I'd like some clarification; Is a US senate interruption just a single chance for the interrupter to speak, or is there a chance for back and forth between the speaker and interrupter? (this doesn't seem to be mentioned in the rules you've linked)
– Jorn Vernee
1 hour ago
1
1
The process is not designed for a back and forth. It is designed for a series of speeches. They could engage in a back and forth, but it would involve a lot of "I cede the floor to ..." And since such ceding is voluntary, they wouldn't necessarily have to cede back (although the first speaker might eventually get the remaining time back). This is debate like a debate team debates rather than how two individuals would debate. There will seldom be a back and forth because the rules don't encourage it.
– Brythan
38 mins ago
The process is not designed for a back and forth. It is designed for a series of speeches. They could engage in a back and forth, but it would involve a lot of "I cede the floor to ..." And since such ceding is voluntary, they wouldn't necessarily have to cede back (although the first speaker might eventually get the remaining time back). This is debate like a debate team debates rather than how two individuals would debate. There will seldom be a back and forth because the rules don't encourage it.
– Brythan
38 mins ago
Ok, thanks for the response. I kinda miss the back and forth when watching US debates. The Dutch ones seem to be designed around that, and the interesting part is that it forces people to go off script and think of a response on the fly. Also, the time limit for speakers is a lot shorter, usually only around 3-4 minutes (which is paused during an interruption).
– Jorn Vernee
28 mins ago
Ok, thanks for the response. I kinda miss the back and forth when watching US debates. The Dutch ones seem to be designed around that, and the interesting part is that it forces people to go off script and think of a response on the fly. Also, the time limit for speakers is a lot shorter, usually only around 3-4 minutes (which is paused during an interruption).
– Jorn Vernee
28 mins ago
add a comment |Â
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fpolitics.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f34235%2fwhat-is-the-us-senate-mechanism-for-members-to-respond-to-challenge-each-other-d%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password