What to know about a vote-a-rama, the Senate's voting marathon
Few if any of the amendments are expected to win enough support to add or remove provisions from the bill. But it is still a rare occasion when senators can get votes on nearly any subject before the final vote to approve the entire legislative package.
Here's what you need to know about a vote-a-rama.
What is a vote-a-rama?
A vote-a-rama is a legislative event that was born out of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974, according to the Senate's website.
Following a debate on a budget resolution or reconciliation bill, senators can introduce an unlimited number of amendments with each receiving a vote.
Republicans on June 28 offered up different interpretations on the importance of the amendment process, with Sen. Susan Collins, R-Maine, signaling she too had things she'd seek to revise that will go a long way toward helping her support the package.
"There's some very good changes that have been made in the latest version, but I want to see further changes," Collins said.
Collins' GOP colleague, Sen. Brian Moreno of Ohio, painted a different and more partisan picture on the amendment slog ahead. "I want everybody watching this to remember this as you listen to probably what's going to be 30-plus hours of complete nonsense from the other side," the freshman Republican said on the floor.
The Senate previously defined a vote-a-rama as a piece of legislation voted on 15 times or more in a day. Daniel S. Holt, Associate Historian for the U.S. Senate Historical Office, told USA TODAY in an email that the change was made to align the chamber's definition with its connections to budget bills.
"While the term is completely colloquial and has no firm definition in any official manner, we thought this was more in-line with the historical use of the term," Holt said.
When was the first vote-a-rama?
The Senate credits the first vote-a-rama to votes on a budget resolution taken on May 12, 1980.
The chamber's website states that staff had been using the term as early as 1992. When Republican Whip Trent Lott of Mississippi was quoted by United Press International in 1996 using the phrase to refer to the event, it stuck.
How many vote-a-ramas have there been?
The Senate counts 45 vote-a-ramas.
Which vote-a-rama had the most votes?
The vote-a-rama held on March 13, 2008, holds the current record for most amendments voted on: 44.
How does a vote-a-rama work?
Votes in a vote-a-rama work differently than during regular Senate order.
Senate rules preclude debate on an amendment during the marathon of votes, though they can be waived to allow an opponent and a supporter of an amendment to speak for 30 seconds - according to former Senate aide Keith Hennessey.
Votes are taken consecutively, and senators agree to shorten the window for votes from 15 minutes to 10 minutes, according to Hennessey.
Can senators eat or drink during a vote-a-rama?
Senate rules prohibit food on the floor. But the good news is they do not have to remain on the floor for the entirety of the proceedings.
One quirk in precedent allows for members to drink milk while in the chamber. On January 24, 1966, then Sen. Everett Dirksen, R-Illinois, asked the presiding officer if a page could go to a restaurant and return with a glass of milk while debating a bill to repeal a portion of the Taft-Hartly Act. The Congressional record from the day shows the presiding officer saying that there was nothing in the rules prohibiting it.
Senators also do have access to candy throughout the proceedings through "the candy desk" currently held by Sen. Markwayne Mullin, R-Oklahoma. The tradition of keeping candy in the desk nearest to the busiest entrance in the chamber began in 1965 when then Sen. George Murphy, R-California, kept lozenges to help soothe his throat following surgery and shared them with members across the aisle, according to the Senate.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Independent
an hour ago
- The Independent
Trump live updates: Congress to vote on ‘Big, Beautiful Bill' in defining moment for president's second term
President Donald Trump 's 'Big, Beautiful Bill' will be subjected to an unlimited series of amendment votes in the Senate on Monday. The 940-page tax and spending bill, which maps out much of the president's domestic legislative agenda, narrowly passed the House of Representatives last month and scraped through the Senate on Saturday night 51-49 after Majority Leader John Thune and Vice President JD Vance managed to persuade most Republican dissenters to fall in line. The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office (CBO) has warned that passage of the bill will add an estimated $3.3trn to the United States's $36.2trn national debt over the next decade, which Democrats hope will give conservative fiscal hawks cause for concern. Trump himself has urged his party to push through the bill regardless and ignore objections raised by the Senate parliamentarian about several of its provisions as its July 4 deadline looms. Senators will start voting on the amendments, on what could prove to be a very long day, from 9am ET (2pm GMT) on Monday. Senate to vote on 'Big, Beautiful Bill' amendments on crucial day for Donald Trump's presidency President Donald Trump's 'Big, Beautiful Bill' will be subjected to an unlimited series of amendment votes in the Senate on Monday in what promises to be a defining moment for his second term in the White House. The 940-page tax and spending bill, which maps out much of the president's domestic legislative agenda, narrowly passed the House of Representatives earlier this month and scraped through the Senate on Saturday night 51-49 after Majority Leader John Thune and Vice President JD Vance managed to persuade most Republican dissenters to fall in line. Senators will start voting on amendments to the contentious megabill from 9am ET (2pm GMT) on Monday, a process that could well run long. Joe Sommerlad30 June 2025 09:10 Good morning Hello and welcome to The Independent 's live coverage of Capitol Hill as the United States Senate reconvenes to vote on an unlimited series of amendments to Donald Trump's signature 'Big, Beautiful Bill' on what promises to be a very long day indeed. Joe Sommerlad30 June 2025 08:50
Daily Mail
5 hours ago
- Daily Mail
Donald Trump 'doesn't like' Kevin Rudd - and Anthony Albanese needs to do something about it before it's too late, warns GOP pollster
A prominent Republican pollster has claimed Donald Trump does not like Australia's ambassador to the United States, Kevin Rudd, and has warned Anthony Albanese to sack him if he wants to secure a tariff exemption. Brent Buchanan, a GOP pollster and messaging strategist, said that Australia needed to replace Rudd in Washington DC if it hoped to secure a carve out from Trump's punitive 'Liberation Day' tariffs. 'Donald Trump needs to find an Australian that he likes or Australia needs to find an Australian that Donald Trump likes and let that person take point because so much with Donald Trump is personal relationships,' Mr Buchanan told Sky News. Host Laura Jayes asked whether Trump didn't like Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese, who is yet to secure a face-to-face meeting with the US President. 'I think he doesn't like the current ambassador and that's one of the biggest issues,' Mr Buchanan responded. Rudd, a former Prime Minister, was appointed as Australia's ambassador to the US by Albanese in March 2023. He enjoys cross-party support in Australia, but his position has been under threat since past negative comments he has made about Trump came to light. In November, shortly after Trump's historic election win, Daily Mail Australia revealed how Rudd never envisioned his comeback, calling his first term a period of 'episodic craziness'. In November, shortly after Trump's historic election win, Daily Mail Australia revealed how Rudd never envisioned his comeback , calling his first term a period of 'episodic craziness' 'Never take a backwards step in saying we're allies with the United States,' Rudd said in June 2022, nine months before he would be appointed as Australia's man in Washington. 'For all the American pre-disposition to episodic craziness... Look at Trump: how did that happen? That was a walk on the wild side for all of us.' In other, since deleted comments, Rudd has labelled Trump a 'village idiot', a 'traitor to the West' and 'the most destructive president in history'. But Mr Buchanan, founder of Cygnal Polling and Analytics, said Trump placed a lot of emphasis on personal relationships and would be open to cutting a deal with the right person. 'Donald Trump's a deal maker and so if you bring a deal, he's going to talk through it,' he added. Australia is facing 10 per cent tariffs on goods exported to the US and - like every US trading partner except the UK - has been hit with 50 per cent tariffs on aluminium and steel sent to America. The deadline for the higher reciprocal tariffs to come into effect is 9 July. On Monday morning, Albanese said his government was continuing to push for the tariffs to be removed. 'We'll continue to put our case forward that it shouldn't be 10 (per cent). It should be zero. That is what a reciprocal tariff will be,' he told reporters in Canberra. The Australian government has repeatedly called the trade measures an 'act of economic self-harm'. Foreign Minister Penny Wong is heading to Washington this week for 'Quad' talks with her counterparts from the US, India and Japan. She is expected to hold one-on-one meetings with US Secretary of State Marco Rubio where tariffs are expected to be high on the agenda.
The Herald Scotland
6 hours ago
- The Herald Scotland
Why mentally incompetent immigration detainees suddenly lost attorneys
Grevil Paz Cartagena is mentally ill and legally incompetent. He has been in detention for nearly 600 days. Woodruff was the only person the 31-year-old Honduran immigrant could talk to. That was aside from the voices in his head. She had promised not to abandon him, but the Trump administration quietly canceled a $12 million annual contract on April 25. Since 2013, it had paid private attorneys to represent detainees deemed mentally or cognitively incompetent and unable to represent themselves. Those attorneys filed a federal lawsuit in May challenging the abrupt change. In an April memo reviewed by USA TODAY, DOJ contractors crossed out any reference to "nationwide" protections for detained noncitizens with serious mental disorders. By law, detainees with severe disabilities are still supposed to be given a fair hearing where they can present evidence and cross-examine witnesses. But now they're caught up in the administration's zest to ramp up removals under the auspices of saving taxpayers. That means 289 immigrants like Paz Cartagena facing removal around the country are suddenly adrift. Any newly detained immigrants deemed incompetent will not be afforded attorneys. In a legal twist, hundreds of other mentally incompetent detainees in three states - Arizona, California, and Washington - are still offered attorneys due to a previous court ruling. The rest are left to fend for themselves. "So, are you still going to be there in court?" a still-confused Paz Cartagena asked Woodruff before hanging up the video call. Now formally withdrawn from the case, Woodruff says she's struggling to fully detach. "Personally, it's devastating," Woodruff said. "I can't put this any clearer. If they deport him, he will die. And that's on my spirit." Immigration attorneys told USA TODAY they face an impossible choice: continue working for free or cut ties with their most vulnerable clients they pledged to defend. Six attorneys enrolled in the program spoke about the sudden end to the funding. They facilitated interviews behind the detention center doors with detainees with a variety of mental health challenges. With the help of intermediaries and advocates, all but one of the detainees decided to remain anonymous for fear of impacting their cases. Only Paz Cartagena is identified by name. The Department of Justice, which administers the program, declined to answer questions about its past or future, citing pending litigation challenging the cut. National and local staff for the immigration court in Paz Cartagena's case said immigration judges are barred from speaking about it. Depression inside detention While in detention, Paz Cartagena's anxiety waxes and wanes. Sleepless nights torment him. If it's bad, he'll bang his head against the cinderblock wall until a concussion sets in. The pain numbs him. "The voices try to convince me to hurt myself," he said in Spanish. He lies awake until the 9 a.m. morning headcount at his facility. He says he feels lost and only relies on the voice who talks to him. That was until Woodruff flew into town April 8. When his now-former attorney arrived from New Orleans to the Aurora, Colorado detention center to meet Paz Cartagena, "he was really truly alone, and struggling." The pair bonded over their mutual love of tattoos and reggaeton music. They listen to the same top artists: Wisin & Yandel, Daddy Yankee and of course, Bad Bunny. After an hour, the two hugged and parted. "Thank you for coming. I trust you, and I can tell you're going to help," Paz Cartagena told her. Woodruff helped him compile an asylum claim. Paz Cartagena identifies as bisexual. He said he was raped by a police officer back home before crossing into the United States. Going back to Honduras as a member of the LGBTQ community would mean ostracization, violence or death. The U.S. Department of State warns that the Honduran police and government there "incite, perpetrate, condone or tolerate" such violence against LGBTQ individuals. His mother and siblings are back in Honduras. He has some relatives in the United States, but they are not in touch. In a recent phone interview with USA TODAY, Paz Cartagena spoke in circles, confused about the timeline of his life and what would happen next. "Someone is here with me, in my head," Paz Cartagena said. "The voice writes and helps me write music." Days later, in another interview, Paz Cartagena was lucid and understood his quandary. He recalled the run-in with local police in Colorado. He had been self-medicating with recreational drugs, and was confused when plainclothes officers approached him. That set off the cascade of events leading to his detention. Records show he has not been convicted of a crime in the United States. But immigration officials said he is in the country illegally and subject to deportation. Mental health and Djibouti The mental health of detainees often goes unnoticed throughout immigration proceedings. It's usually up to an immigration judge or attorney to raise concerns and order an evaluation. But given the rapid-fire deportation regime, those timelines can be compressed or sometimes nonexistent. That was the case for Nyo Myint, one of the eight men sent on a disputed flight to South Sudan that was recently upheld by the U.S. Supreme Court. Court records obtained by USA TODAY show instead of being housed in jail pending trial on sexual assault charges, Myint lived at the Lincoln Regional Center, a psychiatric hospital. Psychologists there evaluated him and ruled him mentally incompetent on four separate occasions until November 2019. He entered a no contest plea in 2020 and was sentenced to 12 years in prison. He served a fraction of his time before being paroled in 2023 and taken into ICE custody and eventually removed. "I did not learn about his previous competency issues," Jonathan Ryan, Myint's Texas immigration attorney, recently told USA TODAY. "I wish I had." DOJ defend actions in court While hundreds of detainees face uncertainty, the organizations that were representing them are suing in federal court to have their funding restored. DOJ attorneys, however, argue that that suit isn't about ending a program, but rather cutting a contract, which is within the scope of the government's rights. They have not signaled they will revamp the funding with other attorneys. Representatives from the Executive Office of Immigration Review cited the pending case and declined to answer questions about changes to the arrangement, known as the National Qualified Representative Program. Despite the alarm over an ethical bind, the DOJ points out that many attorneys in the program have said they'll continue offering their services after scrounging up other funding. That's the case for Yarima Gonzalez Crespo, an attorney with the Pennsylvania Immigration Resource Center, who will continue aiding a 63-year-old with mental health challenges facing removal. "I tried this alone," the Mexican grandmother client said on a video interview from detention. "It was very hard, and the judge told me I couldn't do this by myself." The woman said she was a green card holder and lived in the country since 1979. Then a misdemeanor assault charge in 2020 upended her life. It wasn't until she landed on an ICE transfer flight in 2024 that she realized the gravity of the situation. "I couldn't breathe, I was numb, petrified," she said. "I told them: 'No, I can't stay here, I've got my legal papers, I just got out of jail, I did my time.' I knew I would get sick again." After eight months of detention, a judge recognized the woman's rapidly deteriorating mental state and assigned representation. Now on steady medication, the woman says she's busy sweeping and scrubbing the detention center for $10 a week. She uses it exclusively to call her family - $2.50 for a three-minute call, $4 for video. The grandmother of 10 has been keeping her cooking skills sharp in detention, making due with limited ingredients for tamales and birria tacos. Being the eldest detainee with her black-framed glasses and graying hair, she said others call her Mama. "You have to make them with love, it's not any special seasoning, it's love," she said. Immigration judges question changes News of the changes to the attorney program trickled from the administration in a confusing mix of messages. No changes planned as of Jan. 24, then an email signaled a cut April 3, then a rapid reversal: disregard the cut. And finally, the official notice from EOIR Acting Director Sirce Owen: As of April 25, the funding was cut "for convenience." No other justification for the changes has been delivered. Paul Schmidt, former immigration judge and chair of the Board of Immigration Appeals, called it another battle in the "administration's all-out war on due process." "It's disheartening when we took a system that was created to implement best practices and now we're back to the worst way to do this," Schmidt said. Despite the administration's aim to streamline and accelerate immigration judgments, the funding cut could backfire, said Dana Leigh Marks, a retired immigration judge. "It's a travesty," Marks said. "It's cutting off your nose to spite your face. These are difficult cases that immigration judges know move faster with a qualified representative." Marks said judges will be left to wade through immigrant stories for relevant legal elements and the lack of attorneys will create more opportunities for error. That could in turn lead to more appeals and slower judgments. Another day in court For Paz Cartagena, the young Honduran facing removal, he's back on his own, writing songs and sketching art while he awaits his court date. His favorite song, "November Rain" by Guns N' Roses plays in his head while he battles his depression and suicidal ideation. Woodruff, his former attorney, still keeps in touch via phone despite officially withdrawing from the case. She worries his mental health has only worsened as he faces a judge who signaled Paz Cartagena should be able to represent himself. "I don't know what to tell the judge," he said. "I don't know what I am supposed to do." On June 30, he'll plead his case alone in front of Immigration Judge Elizabeth McGrail. It could be the confused, quiet Paz Cartagena speaking, or the sharp version he feels on good days. Nick Penzenstadler is a reporter on USA TODAY's investigative team working on national projects. Tips or questions? You can contact him via e-mail npenz@ or on Signal at 720-507-5273.
