Order Code RL34491
Unanimous Consent Agreements Establishing
a 60-Vote Threshold for Passage of Legislation
in the Senate
May 19, 2008
Megan Suzanne Lynch
Analyst on the Congress and Legislative Process
Government and Finance Division

---

Unanimous Consent Agreements Establishing
a 60-Vote Threshold for Passage of Legislation
in the Senate
Summary
The Senate frequently enters into unanimous consent agreements (sometimes
referred to as “UC agreements” or “time agreements”) that establish procedures for
the consideration of legislation that the Senate is considering or will soon consider.
In recent practice, such unanimous consent agreements have sometimes included a
provision that would require a 60-vote threshold to be met for amendments or
legislation to be considered agreed to, rather than the simple majority ordinarily
required. These amendments or measures may be of a controversial nature with the
potential for causing a filibuster. By incorporating a 60-vote threshold, such UC
agreements avoid the multiple requirements imposed by Senate Rule XXII for
invoking cloture, while preserving the same requirement for super-majority support.
This report will be updated each session of Congress.

---

Contents
Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
Function and Effects of Adopting a 60-Vote Requirement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
Language and Recent Increase in Frequency . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
Method and Sources . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
List of Tables
Table 1. Identified Senate-Adopted Unanimous Consent Agreements
Establishing a 60-Vote Threshold for Passage of Legislation: 1999-2008 . . 4

---

Unanimous Consent Agreements
Establishing a 60-Vote Threshold for
Passage of Legislation in the Senate
Introduction
The Senate’s emphasis on individual and minority rights, reflected in both its
standing rules and chamber custom,1 can make it challenging for the chamber to
achieve its various goals in a timely manner. For this reason, the Senate routinely
chooses to set aside its standing rules by unanimous consent.2 This is done formally
through UC agreements, which in many cases outline the terms under which specific
legislation will be considered. Under recent practice, these UC agreements
sometimes include a provision imposing a 60-vote requirement for approval of
amendments or legislation, instead of the simple majority vote3 ordinarily required
in the Senate.4 These amendments or measures are sometimes of a controversial
nature with potential to be subjected to extended consideration or even a filibuster.
By incorporating a 60-vote threshold, such UC agreements avoid the multiple
requirements associated with Senate Rule XXII, both for invoking cloture and for
consideration under cloture. Such UC agreements ensure that a measure will not be
successful without the same level of super-majority support that would be required
for cloture by stipulating that if the 60-vote threshold is not reached, the matter will
be disposed of. As with all UC agreements, once agreed to, they can be altered only
by the adoption of a further UC agreement.
Function and Effects of Adopting
a 60-Vote Requirement
Several possible effects could result from the Senate choosing to impose a 60-
vote threshold for the passage of legislation. First, for cases in which a large majority
1 For information, see CRS Report RL30850, Minority Rights and Senate Procedures, by
Judy Schneider.
2 For information on UC agreements, see CRS Report RS20594, How Unanimous Consent
Agreements Regulate Senate Floor Action, by Richard S. Beth.
3 One half-plus-one of the members voting, assuming a quorum. Floyd M. Riddick and Alan
S. Frumin, Riddick’s Senate Procedure: Precedents and Practices, 101st Cong., 1st sess.,
S.Doc. 101-28 (Washington: GPO, 1992), p. 912.
4 In the Senate, super-majority support is required, among other things, to suspend the rules,
waive certain provisions of the Congressional Budget Act, make a bill a special order,
postpone treaty consideration indefinitely, and invoke cloture. For information, see CRS
Report 98-779, Super-Majority Votes in the Senate, by Walter Oleszek.

---

CRS-2
of Senators is in favor of or opposed to the question, the time that would ordinarily
be required to invoke cloture can be avoided. Once a cloture petition has been
submitted, it must lay over until the second calendar day that the Senate is in session
before a vote on cloture occurs. For a cloture vote to be successful, in most cases
three-fifths of all Senators must vote in the affirmative (i.e., 60 votes if there are no
vacancies).5 If the cloture vote is successful, another 30 hours of consideration are
in order before a vote on the underlying business must occur. Incorporating the 60-
vote threshold into a UC agreement allows the Senate to bypass these time
consuming requirements.
Second, for cases in which a large majority either in favor of or against the
question cannot be assumed, the 60-vote threshold accomplishes the same purpose
as a filibuster by preventing or delaying passage, but without requiring the Senate to
engage in extended debate. Thus, surrendering the right to filibuster may be more
palatable if Senators are confident a measure will not pass without super-majority
support.
Another reason that a 60-vote threshold might be included in a UC agreement
is that it presents Senators with an opportunity to vote directly on the underlying
policy issue. Votes on cloture often fail and consequently a vote on the actual
measure or amendment may never occur. The 60-vote threshold in a UC agreement
has the effect of bypassing the procedural vote to grant Senators a direct vote on the
policy issue at hand.
Lastly, in many of these 60-vote threshold UC agreements, it is a pair (or group)
of amendments or measures that are jointly held to the 60-vote requirement. Many
of the pairs (or groups) are competing options for the same policy issue. This allows
the Senate to debate and choose between contending alternatives in a timely and
controlled manner.
Language and Recent Increase in Frequency
Although examples of UC agreements placing a similar 60-vote threshold
provisions can be found dating from at least the early 1990s, the practice has
increased in frequency over the last four years.
Unanimous consent agreements that impose a 60-vote threshold may be agreed
to at any time, either in advance, or during consideration. It is notable that unlike
Senate rules requiring super majorities, which typically are framed in terms of a
fraction either of the membership or those voting (e.g., two-thirds, three-fifths), these
UC agreements explicitly state the number of votes required. Given that practices
do not generally specify disposition for a question that achieves a majority vote, but
not a super-majority vote imposed by unanimous consent, the language of these UC
agreements typically provides for disposition of the amendment or measure if it fails
5 For amendments to the standing rules of the Senate, two-thirds of Senators present and
voting must agree. Senate Rule XXII. For information on cloture, see CRS Report 98-425,
Invoking Cloture in the Senate, by Christopher M. Davis.

---

CRS-3
to achieve the required 60 votes. Typically, the matter is withdrawn, but it could
alternately be laid on the table or returned to the calendar For example, in one UC
agreement, the Senate agreed that “... two amendments be subject to a 60 affirmative
vote threshold, and that if neither achieves that threshold, then it be withdrawn.”6
Thus far in the 110th Congress (2007-2008), 30 amendments have been held to
the 60-vote threshold as a result of a provision in a UC agreement: seven were
adopted, 22 failed and one was withdrawn. Also in the 110th Congress, seven
measures have been held to the 60-vote threshold as a result of a UC agreement. Of
these, five passed and two failed. Lastly, in the 110th Congress, two motions to
concur with House amendments with a Senate amendment were held to the 60-vote
threshold by a UC agreement, one passed and one failed.
In the 109th Congress (2005-2006), eight amendments were held to the 60-vote
threshold as a result of a provision in a UC agreement. Of these, six failed and two
were ruled out of order. Also in the 109th Congress, three measures were held to the
threshold, all of which passed. No amendments or measures held to a 60-vote
threshold as the result of a UC agreement were identified in the 108th (2003-2004),
107th (2001-2002) or 106th (1999-2000) Congresses.
Of the 50 amendments, motions, and measures held to the 60-vote threshold
since the 106th Congress, an additional 13 (26%) would have been successful had
only a simple majority been required for passage.
Method and Sources
Table 1, as of May 8, 2008, shows all matters identified as having been subject
to a 60-vote requirement as the result of a provision in a UC agreement, from the
beginning of the 106th Congress in 1999 through the current 110th Congress. The
Congressional Record pages on which the specified consent agreements appear are
also included.
No source provides an explicit comprehensive list or index of consent
agreements having specific features such as the 60-vote threshold. Instead, the
instances presented were results of an electronic search done by CRS analysts of the
text of the Congressional Record in the Legislative Information System (LIS) of the
U.S. Congress for the phrase “60 votes” “60-vote threshold” or “60 votes in the
affirmative” or variants. The information obtained through this search was
supplemented as necessary by an examination of bill status information in the LIS.
This broad search captured many proceedings that referred to other forms of 60-vote
requirement, which were eliminated from the results presented.
6 Sen. Barbara Boxer, remarks in the Senate, Congressional Record, daily edition, vol.154,
April 17, 2008, p. S3109.

---

CRS-4
Table 1. Identified Senate-Adopted Unanimous Consent Agreements Establishing a 60-Vote Threshold
for Passage of Legislation: 1999-2008
(as of May 8, 2008)
Congressional Record
Related Bill Number
Legislation
Sponsor
Citation for UC
Final Senate Disposition
(in cases of amendments)
Agreement
110th Congress (2007-2008)
S.Amdt. 4539
Boxer (D-CA)
H.R. 1195
04/17/2008
S.Amdt. 4539 agreed to in Senate by Yea-Nay Vote 64-28.
Highway Technical
p. S3109
Record Vote # 105 (4/17/2008).
Corrections Act of 2007
S.Amdt. 4538
Coburn (R-OK)
S.Amdt. 4538 not agreed to in Senate by Yea-Nay Vote 49-43.
Record Vote # 106 (4/17/2008).a
S.Amdt. 3920
Whitehouse (D-RI)
S. 2248
02/11/2008
S.Amdt. 3920 agreed to in Senate by Voice Vote.b
FISA Amendments Act of
p. S845
2008
S.Amdt. 3910
Feinstein (D-CA)
S.Amdt. 3910 not agreed to in Senate by Yea-Nay Vote 57-41.
Record Vote # 13 (2/12/2008).a
S.Amdt. 3919
Feinstein (D-CA)
S.Amdt. 3919 not agreed to in Senate by Yea-Nay Vote 41-57.
Record Vote # 18 (2/12/2008).

---

CRS-5
Congressional Record
Related Bill Number
Legislation
Sponsor
Citation for UC
Final Senate Disposition
(in cases of amendments)
Agreement
S.Amdt. 3919c
Feinstein (D-CA)
S. 2248
01/31/2008
S.Amdt. 3919 not agreed to in Senate by Yea-Nay Vote 41-57.
FISA Amendments Act of
p. S536
Record Vote # 18 (2/12/2008).
2008
S.Amdt. 3930
Cardin (D-MD)
S.Amdt. 3930 not agreed to in Senate by Yea-Nay Vote 49-46.
Record Vote # 7 (2/6/2008).a
S.Amdt. 3920c
Whitehouse (D-RI)
S.Amdt. 3920 agreed to in Senate by Voice Vote.b

---

CRS-6
Congressional Record
Related Bill Number
Legislation
Sponsor
Citation for UC
Final Senate Disposition
(in cases of amendments)
Agreement
S.Amdt. 3876
Levin (D-MI)
H.R. 2764
12/18/2007
S.Amdt. 3876 not agreed to in Senate by Yea-Nay Vote 50-45.
Department of State,
p. S15828
Recorded Vote # 438 (12/18/2007).a
Foreign Operations and
S.Amdt. 3875
Feingold (D-WI)
Related Programs
S.Amdt. 3875 not agreed to in Senate by Yea-Nay Vote 24-71.
Appropriations Act, 2008d
Record Vote # 43 (12/18/2007).
Motion to concur
McConnell (R-KY)
Motion agreed to in Senate by Yea-Nay Vote 70-25.
in House Amdt.
Recorded Vote # 439 (12/18/2007).
No. 2 to the
Senate Amdt. to
H.R. 2764, with
an Amdt. No.
3874
Motion not agreed to in Senate by Yea Nay Vote 48-46.
Motion to concur
Reid (D-NV)
Record Vote # 440 (12/18/2007).a
in House Amdt.
No. 1 to Senate
Amdt. To H.R.
2764, with an
Amdt. No. 3877
S.Amdt. 3640
Craig (R-ID)
H.R. 2419
12/13/2007
S.Amdt. 3640 not agreed to in Senate by Yea-Nay Vote 37-58.
Food and Energy Security
p. 15417
Record Vote # 429 (12/13/2007).
Act of 2007

---

CRS-7
Congressional Record
Related Bill Number
Legislation
Sponsor
Citation for UC
Final Senate Disposition
(in cases of amendments)
Agreement
S.Amdt. 3530
Coburn (R-OK)
H.R. 2419
12/13/2007
S.Amdt. 3530 as modified agreed to in Senate by Unanimous
Food and Energy Security
p. S15412
Consent (12/13/2007).e
Act of 2007
S.Amdt. 3666
Tester (D-MT)
S.Amdt. 3666 not agreed to in Senate by Yea-Nay Vote 40-55.
Record Vote # 427 (12/13/2007).
S.Amdt. 3819
Brown (D-OH)
S.Amdt. 3819 not agreed to in Senate by Yea-Nay Vote 32-63.
Record Vote # 428 (12/13/2007).
S.Amdt. 3695
Dorgan (D-ND)
H.R. 2419
12/11/2007
S.Amdt. 3695 as not agreed to in Senate by Yea-Nay Vote 56-
Food and Energy Security
p. S15128
43. Record Vote # 424 (12/13/2007).a
Act of 2007
S.Amdt. 3673
Gregg (R-NH)
S.Amdt. 3673 not agreed to in Senate by Yea-Nay Vote 41-53.
Record Vote # 422 (12/12/2007).
S.Amdt. 3810
Klobuchar (D-MN)
S.Amdt. 3810 not agreed to in Senate by Yea-Nay Vote 48-47.
Record Vote # 426 (12/13/2007).a
S.Amdt. 2997
Biden (D-DE)
H.R. 1585
09/26/2007
S.Amdt. 2997 agreed to in Senate by Yea-Nay Vote 75-23.
National Defense
p. S12093
Record Vote # 348 (9/26/2007).
Authorization Act for Fiscal
S.Amdt. 3017
Kyl (R-AZ)
Year 2008
S.Amdt. 2997 agreed to in Senate by Yea-Nay Vote 76-22.
Record Vote # 349 (9/26/2007).

---

CRS-8
Congressional Record
Related Bill Number
Legislation
Sponsor
Citation for UC
Final Senate Disposition
(in cases of amendments)
Agreement
S.Amdt. 2924
Feingold (D-WI)
H.R. 1585
09/20/2007
S.Amdt. 2924 not agreed to in Senate by Yea-Nay Vote 28 -
National Defense
p. S11787
70. Record Vote # 345 (9/20/2007).
Authorization Act for Fiscal
Year 2008
S.Amdt. 2947
Boxer (D-CA)
H.R. 1585
09/20/2007
S.Amdt. 2947 not agreed to in the Senate by Yea-Nay Vote
National Defense
p. S11782
50-47. Record Vote # 343 (09/20/2007).a
Authorization Act for Fiscal
S.Amdt. 2934
Cornyn (R-TX)
Year 2008
S.Amdt. 2934 agreed to in Senate by Yea-Nay Vote 72 - 25.
Record Vote # 344 (09/20/2007).
S.Amdt. 2898
Levin (D-MI)
H.R. 1585
09/20/2007
S.Amdt. 2898 not agreed to in Senate by Yea-Nay Vote 47-47.
National Defense
p. S11801
Record Vote # 346 (09/21/2007).
Authorization Act for Fiscal
Year 2008
S.Amdt. 2909
Webb (D-VA)
H.R. 1585
09/19/ 2007
S.Amdt. 2909 not agreed to in Senate by Yea-Nay Vote 56-44.
National Defense
p. S11731
Record Vote # 341 (09/21/2007).a
Authorization Act for Fiscal
S.Amdt. 2918
McCain (R-AZ)
Year 2008
S.Amdt. 2918 not agreed to in Senate by Yea-Nay Vote 55-45.
Record Vote # 342 (09/19/2007).a

---

CRS-9
Congressional Record
Related Bill Number
Legislation
Sponsor
Citation for UC
Final Senate Disposition
(in cases of amendments)
Agreement
S. 2011
Levin (D-MI)
08/03/2007
S. 2011 not agreed to in Senate by Yea-Nay Vote 43 - 45.
The Protect
p. S10861
Record Vote # 310 (08/03/2007).
America Act of
2007
S. 1927
McConnell (R-KY)
S. 1927 agreed to in the Senate with an amendment
Protect America
Senate with an amendment by Yea-Nay Vote 60 - 28.
Act of 2007
Record Vote # 309 (08/03/2007).
S.Amdt. 2032
Hagel (R-NE)
H.R. 1585
07/11/07
S.Amdt. 2032 not agreed to in Senate by Yea-Nay Vote 52-45.
National Defense
p. S9005
Record Vote #243 (7/11/2007).a
Authorization Act for Fiscal
S.Amdt. 2078
Graham (R-SC)
Year 2008
S.Amdt. 2078 not agreed to in Senate by Yea-Nay Vote 41-55.
Record Vote #244 (7/11/2007).
S.Amdt. 1566
Warner (R-VA)
H.R. 6
06/14/07
S.Amdt. 1566 not agreed to in Senate by Yea-Nay Vote 43-44.
Energy Independence and
p. S7712
Record Vote # 212 (6/14/2007).
Security Act of 2007
S.Amdt. 1578
Menendez (D-NJ)
S.Amdt. 1578, amendment S.Amdt. 1566 having failed to
achieve the 60 votes required for adoption, withdrawn in
Senate (6/14/2007).

---

CRS-10
Congressional Record
Related Bill Number
Legislation
Sponsor
Citation for UC
Final Senate Disposition
(in cases of amendments)
Agreement
S.Amdt. 1176
Feingold (D-WI)
S. 1248
06/5/07
S.Amdt. 1176 agreed to in Senate by Yea-Nay Vote 67-26.
Water Resources
p. S7058
Record Vote # 185 (6/5/2007).
Development Act of 2007
S.Amdt. 1170
McConnell (R-KY)
S.Amdt. 1170 not agreed to in Senate by Yea-Nay Vote 41-52.
Record Vote # 184 (6/5/2007).
S.Amdt. 1094
Kerry (D-MA)
H.R. 1495
05/15/07
S.Amdt. 1094 not agreed to in Senate by Yea-Nay Vote 51-42.
Water Resources
p. S6098
Record Vote # 166 (5/15/2007).a
Development Act of 2007
S. 5
Reid (D-NV)
03/29/07
S. 5 agreed to in Senate by Yea-Nay Vote 63-34.
Stem Cell
p. S4221
Record Vote # 127 (4/11/2007).
Research
Enhancement Act
of 2007
S. 30
Coleman (R-MN)
S. 30 agreed to in Senate by Yea-Nay Vote 70-28.
HOPE Act
Record Vote # 128 (4/11/2007).
S.J.Res. 9
Reid (D-NV)
03/15/07
S.J.Res. 9 not agreed to in Senate by Yea-Nay Vote 48-50.
United States
p. S3161
Record Vote # 75 (3/15/2007).
Policy in Iraq
Resolution of
2007

---

CRS-11
Congressional Record
Related Bill Number
Legislation
Sponsor
Citation for UC
Final Senate Disposition
(in cases of amendments)
Agreement
S.Res. 107
Murray (D-WA)
S.Res. 107 agreed to in Senate by Yea-Nay Vote 96-2. Record
A resolution
Vote # 76 (3/15/2007).
expressing the
sense of the
Senate that no
action should be
taken to
undermine the
safety of the
Armed Forces of
the United States
or impact their
ability to
complete their
assigned or future
missions.
S.Con.Res. 20
Gregg (R-NH)
S.Con.Res. 20 agreed to in Senate by Yea-Nay Vote 82-16.
A concurrent
Record Vote # 77 (3/16/07).
resolution
expressing the
sense of
Congress that no

---

CRS-12
Congressional Record
Related Bill Number
Legislation
Sponsor
Citation for UC
Final Senate Disposition
(in cases of amendments)
Agreement
funds should be
cut off or reduced
for American
troops in the field
which would
result in
undermining
their safety or
their ability to
complete their
assigned mission.

---

CRS-13
Congressional Record
Related Bill Number
Legislation
Sponsor
Citation for UC
Final Senate Disposition
(in cases of amendments)
Agreement
109th Congress (2005-2006)
S. 3504
Santorum (R-PA)
6/29/2006
S. 3504 agreed to in Senate by Yea-Nay Vote 100-0.
Fetus Farming
pp. S7169-S7170
Record Vote # 204 (7/18/2006).
Prohibition Act
of 2006
S. 2754
Santorum (R-PA)
S. 2754 agreed to in Senate by Yea-Nay Vote 100-0.
Alternative
Record Vote # 205 (7/18/2006).
Pluripotent Stem
Cell Therapies
Enhancement Act
H.R. 810
Rep. Castle (R-DE)
H.R. 810 agreed to in Senate by Yea-Nay Vote 63-37.
Stem Cell
Record Vote # 206 (7/18/2006).
Research
Enhancement Act
of 2005
S.Amdt. 4322
Kennedy (D-MA)
S. 2766 John Warner
6/20/2006
S.Amdt. 4322 not agreed to in the Senate by Yea-Nay Vote
National Defense
p. S6137
52-46. Record Vote # 179 (6/21/2006).a
Authorization Act for Fiscal
S.Amdt. 4376
Enzi (R-WY)
Year 2007
S.Amdt. 4376 not agreed to in the Senate by Yea-Nay Vote
45-53. Record Vote # 180 (6/21/2006).

---

CRS-14
Congressional Record
Related Bill Number
Legislation
Sponsor
Citation for UC
Final Senate Disposition
(in cases of amendments)
Agreement
S.Amdt. 2165
Coburn (R-OK)
H.R. 3058
10/20/2005
S.Amdt. 2165 not agreed to in the Senate by Yea-Nay Vote
Transportation, Treasury,
p. S11636
15-82. Record Vote # 262 (10/20/2005).
Housing and Urban
S.Amdt. 2181
Stevens (R-AK)
Development, the Judiciary,
S.Amdt. 2181 not agreed to in the Senate by Yea-Nay Vote
the District of Columbia,
33-61. Record Vote # 263 (10/20/2005).
and Independent Agencies
Appropriations Act, 2006
S.Amdt. 2063
Kennedy (D-MA)
H.R. 3058
10/19/2005
S.Amdt. 2063 ruled out of order after motion to waive section
Transportation, Treasury,
p. S11526
425(a)(2) of the Congressional Budget Act (unfunded
Housing and Urban
mandate) not agreed to, 47-51. Record Vote # 257
Development, the Judiciary,
(10/19/2005).
the District of Columbia,
S.Amdt. 2115
Enzi (R-WY)
and Independent Agencies
S.Amdt. 2115 ruled out of order after motion to waive section
Appropriations Act, 2006
425(a)(2) of the Congressional Budget Act (unfunded
mandate) not agreed to, 42-57. Record Vote # 258
(10/19/2005).f
S.Amdt. 44
Kennedy (D-MA)
S. 256
3/3/2005
S.Amdt. 44 not agreed to in the Senate by Yea-Nay Vote 46-
Bankruptcy Abuse
pp. S2050-S2051
49. Record Vote # 26 (3/7/2005).
Prevention and Consumer
S.Amdt. 128
Santorum (R-PA)
Protection Act of 2005
S.Amdt. 128 not agreed to in the Senate by Yea-Nay Vote 38-
61. Record Vote # 27 (3/7/2005).

---

CRS-15
Congressional Record
Related Bill Number
Legislation
Sponsor
Citation for UC
Final Senate Disposition
(in cases of amendments)
Agreement
108th Congress (2003-2004)
None identified
107th Congress (2001-2002)
None identified
106th Congress (1999-2000)
None identified
Sources: Congressional Record and Legislative Information System (LIS) of the United States Congress.
Notes:
a. Unsuccessful amendments or measures that would have passed if only the standard majority vote had been required.
b. A subsequent unanimous consent agreement was agreed to (p. S881) allowing the amendment to be adopted by voice vote.
c. Amendment indicated as being held to 60-vote threshold again in later UC agreement dated 02/11/2008, p S845, also shown in table.
d. Later changed to Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2008.
e. A subsequent unanimous consent agreement was agreed to (p. S15417) allowing the amendment to pass by unanimous consent.
f. The consent agreement provided that “if either amendment does not have 60 votes in the affirmative, that amendment then be automatically withdrawn or fall to the point of order,
if applicable.” In the 109th Congress, 60 votes were required to waive the unfunded mandate point of order.

---