The standing rule that is probably most pivotal for shaping what does and does not occur on the Senate floor is paragraph 1(a) of Rule XIX, which governs debate:
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.
The Presiding Officer of the Senate (unlike the Speaker of the House) may not use the power to recognize Senators in order to control the flow of business. If no Senator holds the floor, any Senator seeking recognition has a right to be recognized. Moreover, once a Senator has been recognized, he or she may make any motion that Senate rules permit, including motions affecting what bills the Senate will consider (though a Senator loses the floor when he or she makes a motion, offers an amendment, or takes one of many other actions). In practice, however, the Senate has modified the effect of this rule by precedent and custom. By precedent, the Majority and Minority Leaders are recognized first if either leader and another Senator are seeking recognition at the same time. And by custom, only the Majority Leader (or another Senator acting at his behest) makes motions or requests affecting when the Senate will meet and what legislation it will consider.
In these respects, Senators relinquish their equal right to recognition and their right to make certain motions, and they do so in order to lend some order and predictability to the Senate's proceedings. Otherwise, it would be nearly impossible for any Senator to predict with assurance when the Senate will be in session and what legislation it will consider. For example, during debate on one bill, any Senator could move that the Senate turn to another bill instead. This would make it very difficult for the Senate to conduct its business in an orderly fashion, and it would be equally difficult for Senators to plan their own schedules with any confidence. Thus, Senate precedents and practices modify the operation of this rule, as it affects recognition, in the interests of the Senate as an institution and in the interests of its members individually.
Even more important is what paragraph 1(a) of Rule XIX says and does not say about the length of debate. The rule imposes a limit of two speeches per Senator per question per day, but it imposes no limit at all on the number of Senators who may make those two speeches, nor on the length of the speeches. In fact, there are few Senate rules that limit the right to debate, and no rules that permit a majority of the Senate to end a debate whenever it is ready to vote for a bill, amendment, or other question that is being considered. When Senators are recognized by the Presiding Officer, they usually may speak for as long as they wish, and questions generally cannot be put to a vote so long as there are Senators who still wish to make the speeches they are permitted to make under Rule XIX.
The House of Representatives may bring a question to a vote if a simple majority agrees to a motion to order the previous question. When meeting in Committee of the Whole, a majority of Representatives also can move to close debate on a pending amendment or sometimes on a bill and all amendments to it. No such motions are possible in the Senate. As a result, a majority of Senators does not have nearly the same control over the pace and timing of their deliberations as does a majority of the House.
There is one partial exception to this generalization. The Senate often disposes of an amendment by agreeing to a motion to lay the amendment on the table. When a Senator who has been recognized makes this motion, it cannot be debated (except by unanimous consent, of course). And if the Senate agrees to the motion to table, the amendment is rejected; to table is to kill. On the other hand, if the Senate defeats the motion, debate on the amendment may resume; the Senate only has determined that it is not prepared at that time to reject the amendment. Thus, a tabling motion can be used to stop debate even if there still are Senators wishing to speak, but only by defeating the amendment at issue. Although the effect of the motion is essentially negative, it frequently is a test vote on Senate support for an amendment. If the motion fails, the Senate may agree to the amendment shortly thereafter.
(The information in this section was compiled under the authority and direction of the Secretary of the Senate, Washington, DC 20510. Questions regarding content on this site can be directed to the Office of the Secretary Webmaster at webmaster@sec.senate.gov.)
