it has been the tradition of this Chamber, when there are rules proposals, to put them on the floor for debate and to hold that debate. Then if the body does not like that, either to defeat them outright or to table them or refer them to committee for further work. Indeed, under the Constitution, it is in order for us to have a debate now as a simple majority to amend our rules. The Constitution calls for a supermajority for impeachments, a supermajority for treaties, but it calls for a simple majority to amend our rules and to organize ourselves. Many Members of this body often talk about the Constitution, and it is the Constitution we are talking about right now when it calls for a simple majority to be able to organize. So that is why, in 1953, the Senate debated Senator Anderson's resolution, eventually defeating it by tabling it. That is why, in 1957 and in 1959, they proceeded to put it on the floor--both sides agreeing that it was appropriate under the Constitution to have the debate in this Chamber--and then to either approve or to vote down or to table or to refer to committee.
On the recordJanuary 25, 2011
Editor's note · Context
Merkley discusses the constitutional basis for debating rules proposals in the Senate.
Share
More from Jeff Merkley
Aug 19, 2026
Oregon has the best wood products in the world, and federal support helps keep our state at the forefront of timber innovation while uplifting our rural communities.
Aug 18, 2026
This type of coercive diplomacy does not serve U.S. global health interests and is extremely susceptible to risk of corruption.
Aug 1, 2026
Now that court documents have confirmed what we knew to be true, we write to demand that you restore previously awarded funding that the Trump Administration has weaponized in an attempt to punish perceived political enemies.
Jul 31, 2026
I’ll keep fighting to strengthen Tribal health care and secure the federal investments that help communities thrive.





