Meanwhile…the other Long (June 12 - 13, 1935)
Excerpts from Louisiana Senator Huey Long’s 15 1/2-Hour Long Filibuster (full of readings of the Constitution) against an amendment to the National Recovery Act (74th Congress Records - Pages 9089 - 9175):
Page 9091:
“Mr. President, yesterday I made the motion to reconsider. I should like to have a copy of the vote just taken if the clerk will favor me with it. The question now before the Senate is my motion to reconsider. I want to find out just what the situation is. There are a number of absentees. In voting on my motion I should want the full Membership present. I do not desire to call for a quorum if it can be avoided. I notice a number of Senators have changed their positions both ways since yesterday. I want to congratulate those who voted my way this morning and also regret that any have seen fit to vote the other way. I cannot understand just how it could be that the vote is 37 to 44. I am reading from the vote just taken, and while I am familiarizing myself with it I want the Senate to understand that I propose to discuss my motion to reconsider. I want to deliberate with this deliberative body and find out whether we are going to proceed further with the consideration of my motion or whether we shall take up some other bill. Someone said to me this morning if I undertook to discuss my motion it would interfere with another bill that he wished to bring up today. I desire to assure the Senate I have no idea whatever of having my motion interfere with bringing up any other bill, but I do want to find out if I can, before we vote on my motion to reconsider, whether or not this is the real representative sentiment of the Senate. There seem to be a number of absentees. I notice the junior Senator from Mississippi [Mr. Bilbo] is absent. The Senator from Arizona [Mr. Ashurst] was absent. I note the absence of the Senator from Pennsylvania [Mr. Davis]. He may be paired. The junior Senator from Kentucky [Mr. Logan] is absent, but paired, and perhaps some others were paired. The Senator from Illinois [Mr. Lewis] is paired. The Senator from California [Mr. McAdoo] is absent this morning. There is absence noted of the senior Senator from Arkansas [Mr. Robinson], who is paired. The Senator from Minnesota [Mr. Shipstead] is not recorded as voting.”
Page 9093-9094:
(In response to Mr. Tydings exclaiming that the Maryland Senator has to leave for 15 minutes in order to keep an appointment) “We have a statute on our books which says-and I desire the attention of Senators—Whoever conspires to violate any law of the United States is guilty of a crime himself. Whosoever conspires with one or more other persons for the purpose of violating or not observing a law of the United States must go to the penitentiary. Whoever conspires to violate any law is guilty of a penitentiary offense. Did not the Postmaster General give out an announcement that after consultation with his cohorts they had concluded to violate the law which required names to be sent to the United States Senate? He openly defied the law. He said, "Not only have I decided to violate it, but there has been set forth, in effect, a conspiracy which has been arranged between myself and my cohorts by which we have decided not to violate 1 law, but 2 laws, 10 laws, 100 laws, a thousand laws." If there ever was a criminal conspiracy which had 10,000 or 100,000 violations hung onto it, it has been this proposition not to send names to the United States Senate. We in the Senate have stood for most of it-that is, my colleagues have, and I have had to. I could not help myself, and the majority of my colleagues have had to do what they thought was the best thing, according to their conscience and their good motives, and we have stood for it the best we knew how. Now and then there has been a voice raised against it besides my own, but nothing comes of it. Finally the Supreme Court of the United States, by a unanimous decision, did say that Congress ought to stay in session and legislate a little bit itself. I was really surprised, Mr. President, at the unanimous decision of the Supreme Court of the United States. I did not expect it. I did not anticipate it. I never for the life of me thought that a unanimous decision would come down which I knew ought to come down.”
Page 9105:
(In response to Mr. Lewis pointing out that his “lecture” about the constitution was irrelevant, calling it a “foreign subject”) That is what I was afraid of. I had just made the remark that it was a vanished subject. But we love to talk about the myths of Greece. Grecian mythology is the most engaging of all subjects. Nothing is so interesting as the tale of the wooden horse that was dragged to the gates of Troy.….(Mr. Barkley points out the irrelevancy of Greek mythology) And I do not even know how to read Latin now. I do know some Latin sayings. I got it all for half a dollar in my early life. However, these things which are foreign, these things which are ancient, these things which are more or less a matter of mythology, are engaging, they are enticing, they are interesting. I was speaking of the ancient and forgotten lore of the Constitution. Even love is not more bewitching than a discussion of its vanishing precepts. That is why I bring them up, that I may interest some in them. So for the past hour I have been devoting my remarks to a lecture on the Constitution. As will be recalled by my friend the Senator from Illinois [Mr. Lewis], who either has read all these things about Troy, or helped to write them, I do not know which. [Laughter.] They dragged a wooden horse right up to the gates of Troy, the Greeks made the Trojans a present of him, and the Trojans carried the wooden horse inside. What they did with the horse after they got it inside I do not know but the horse was there, and we have spent a lot of time talking about that wooden horse. It is the best understood thing there is in the schoolroom today, and my only hope now is to interest the young, rising manhood of this country in the forgotten articles of the Constitution of the United States by arousing in their minds an attraction to these things which are mythical, which are vanishing, and which depend upon tradition for their perpetuity. I read further from the Constitution, or what was the Constitution—from this foreign substance: To regulate commerce with foreign nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian tribes. We still have some commerce with the Indian tribes, which is regulated by Congress. We still have that to some extent. For all I know they are bargaining to give the country back to the Indians. There is still some commerce with them. The Government is carrying that on. But as regards commerce between the several States, that has passed out of the hands of Congress so completely that it does not even try to exercise the power at all. As to regulating commerce with foreign nations, the Congress of the United States does not regulate commerce with foreign countries. It does not regulate the exchange with foreign countries. That is handled by the President of the United States. Congress does not regulate the cost of importing and exporting articles. Not a single provision of that article, "To regulate commerce with foreign nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian tribes," has been preserved to Congress except the right to regulate commerce with the Indians. The balance of it is all gone. I shall yield to any Senator who may wish to undertake to controvert that last statement. Do I hear a dissent Hearing none, silence gives consent! To establish a uniform rule of naturalization, and uniform laws on the subject of bankruptcies throughout the United States. Now, what did we do about that? "Uniform bankruptcies throughout the United States." Who is there who read the municipal bankruptcy law? We pass a law under that particular article—if it is still an article of the Constitution— on municipal bankruptey, under which, according to the interpretation which has been given to that law by at least one court about which I know, one class of creditors who have preferred claims have a right to have their claims approved, notwithstanding the fact that the other kind of creditors who may be 25 or 100 times more numerous than are the others, are denied that kind of an adjudication.”
Many hours later:
Page 9122:
“I am now going to excuse all Members of the Senate, Mr. President, who voted against tabling the motion. I am going to agree that they may go. Would it be out of order if I were to ask unanimous consent that all Senators who voted as the Senator from Alabama voted may now go home? I think it is all right for them to go. They can now go ahead and leave. I will take the personal responsibility of every Member of the Senate leaving at this time who voted as the Senator from Alabama voted. They can now go home. That may cause me to lose some of my crowd. I should like to have as large a crowd as possible to remain. Twenty-two Members of the Senate, however, is nothing to be sneezed at. It often happens that there are not that many present in the Chamber and listening to a Senator who is speaking. I doubt whether there are that many now here who know what I have been talking about. The Senator from South Carolina [Mr. Smith] looked at me as though he wanted to say that he did not think I knew what I was talking about myself. Mr. President, at any rate, I think it is too bad that we should continue so long. I think we ought to adjourn. I really think we ought to. I think we should take a little recess and come back and vote on this matter at, say, 12:30 o'clock or 1 o'clock tomorrow. However, I do not want to withdraw my right to withdraw this motion. I would not want that in any unanimous-consent agreement. I will think this thing over tonight and decide by tomorrow, if this unanimous-consent agreement is reached, to withdraw my motion. I will think that over. But, of course, if Senators do not want to do that, and if they want to hear the matter discussed further, we will have to continue. Many of us have dinner engagements. There are many pageants here in the city today; many are going on without the presence of Members of the Senate. Shriners are here from all parts of the United States. Many of them have come here hoping to have the chance, perhaps for the first time or perhaps for the last time, of seeing the distinguished statesmen in the United States, and they are here and there waiting on every corner. The banquet halls are yearning, the dance halls are yawning, the galleries are packed, packed with those who are crying for the presence of Senators, and I should be glad to have every Member of this body attend these functions tonight If they never go again, Mr. President, if they never go to another one I wish they would go tonight. The guests of the city are here, and they want the Senators to attend these functions. "Whosoever will, let him come "—that ought to be changed to "Whosoever will, let him go." That sounds a good deal better. Let them all go. I think it is a discourtesy to many hundreds of people who are here listening that we should continue this way. There are 27,000 Shriners here in this city today There are enough Shriners here to beat any man for reelection from his own State if they took a notion to go against him The Shriners who are here from Texas could defeat my friend from Texas [Mr. Sheppard], who is up for reelection next year, and what a calamity it would be if that should happen, Just think of it, Mr. President. They are all here begging Senators to come and attend these functions. Senators ought to attend them. Mr President, we ought to have a roll call to find out how many Senators have engagements for the evening and now many have appointments. Why not let us adjourn until 2 o'clock in the morning and come back. That would be all right if they want to have a night session. It would be all right with me. I would just as soon meet in the morning as meet in the evening. It does not make any difference to me. Let us, however, not do an unreasonable thing here. It is going to give a bad odor to the Senate if we do not go ahead here and take care of our engagements. Mr. President, as is known, I have considerable social obligations in this city myself.”
”I was writing a book here a few days ago on social etiquette, but never got the time to complete it. I have prepared recipes for many celebrated Louisiana dishes that I was instructing people how to mix and prepare. I was preparing a recipe for a very fine New Orleans salad dressing. I have been asked to attend many important social affairs in this city to instruct people how to prepare that salad dressing. Also, Mr. President, people up in this part of the country never have learned to fry oysters as well as we have done down our way. I have spent a number of evenings acquainting people with how to prepare oysters. I had a bucket of oysters sent to me from Louisiana the other night, and I was asked by a very fine bunch of my friends if I would not drop around with the New Orleans oysters and fry some of them for them in good Louisiana style and way. So, Mr. President, I bought a frying pan about 8 inches deep. I bought the frying pan because I was afraid they would not have a frying pan there in which I could fry the oysters. I bought a frying pan, as I said, 8 inches deep and about 17 inches in diameter.” (In response to Mr. Tydings asking if Potlikkers were mixed in with the clams) “No; that does not go in with the oysters. I will come to that later. I am coming to that because I am going to have my remarks taken down and a copy made and sent out to the several places where I was supposed to go this evening in order that these recipes and directions may be had by those people, and I will ask the stenographer that as soon as possible he give me at least seven extra copies of these recipes which I dictate into the record so that I may have them for ready circulation in case we do not have an early adjournment. As I was going to illustrate, Mr. President, about these oysters that I got from New Orleans. I bought this frying pan 8 inches deep and 14 to 16 inches or 17 inches in diameter, and I bought a 10-pound bucket of cottonseed-oil lard, but I forgot to get a strainer, and when I got to the place to fry the oysters I had everything there except the meal and the strainer. The lady had some meal, but she did not have any salt to salt the meal with, and that was the only bad thing about it. The strainer which they had was not the best strainer in the world, but I could use it all right. However, they had no salt for the meal, but I took the oysters, Mr. President, the way they should be taken, and laid them out on a muslin cloth, about 12 of them, and then you pull the cloth over and you dry the oysters. You dry them, you see, first with a muslin cloth, and then you take the oysters, after they have been dried, and you roll them into a meal which is salted. I did not have it salted this night, but it should have been salted. [Laughter in the galleries.] Mr. President, you roll these oysters in the dry meal. You do not want to cook the meal or put water in the meal at any time or anything like that. Just salt the meal and roll the oysters in it. Then, let the grease get boiling hot. You want the grease about 6 inches deep. Then you take the oysters and you place the oysters in the strainer, and you put the strainer in the grease, full depth down to the bot-tom. Then, you fry those oysters in boiling grease until they turn a gold-copper color and rise to the top, and then, you take them out and let them cool just a little bit before you eat them. Now, Mr. President, most people cannot tell when an oyster is done. They do not know when it has been fried enough. You wrongfully put them on the bottom of a skillet. You have got to have them totally submerged and you wait until they rise to the top, and when they rise to the top, a golden-copper color, then the oyster is cooked just exactly right, and then you take the strainer up out of the grease in the dish and the oysters are there and you let them drip for a little while and allow them to cool a little and then you eat them.” [1]
Several hours later, Huey Long received a “call of nature“ and left; the proposal was defeated shortly after.
[1] Yes, Huey Long actually did shoehorn a recipe for fried oysters into his filibuster.
Huge thanks to FriendlyGhost!
Page 9091:
“Mr. President, yesterday I made the motion to reconsider. I should like to have a copy of the vote just taken if the clerk will favor me with it. The question now before the Senate is my motion to reconsider. I want to find out just what the situation is. There are a number of absentees. In voting on my motion I should want the full Membership present. I do not desire to call for a quorum if it can be avoided. I notice a number of Senators have changed their positions both ways since yesterday. I want to congratulate those who voted my way this morning and also regret that any have seen fit to vote the other way. I cannot understand just how it could be that the vote is 37 to 44. I am reading from the vote just taken, and while I am familiarizing myself with it I want the Senate to understand that I propose to discuss my motion to reconsider. I want to deliberate with this deliberative body and find out whether we are going to proceed further with the consideration of my motion or whether we shall take up some other bill. Someone said to me this morning if I undertook to discuss my motion it would interfere with another bill that he wished to bring up today. I desire to assure the Senate I have no idea whatever of having my motion interfere with bringing up any other bill, but I do want to find out if I can, before we vote on my motion to reconsider, whether or not this is the real representative sentiment of the Senate. There seem to be a number of absentees. I notice the junior Senator from Mississippi [Mr. Bilbo] is absent. The Senator from Arizona [Mr. Ashurst] was absent. I note the absence of the Senator from Pennsylvania [Mr. Davis]. He may be paired. The junior Senator from Kentucky [Mr. Logan] is absent, but paired, and perhaps some others were paired. The Senator from Illinois [Mr. Lewis] is paired. The Senator from California [Mr. McAdoo] is absent this morning. There is absence noted of the senior Senator from Arkansas [Mr. Robinson], who is paired. The Senator from Minnesota [Mr. Shipstead] is not recorded as voting.”
Page 9093-9094:
(In response to Mr. Tydings exclaiming that the Maryland Senator has to leave for 15 minutes in order to keep an appointment) “We have a statute on our books which says-and I desire the attention of Senators—Whoever conspires to violate any law of the United States is guilty of a crime himself. Whosoever conspires with one or more other persons for the purpose of violating or not observing a law of the United States must go to the penitentiary. Whoever conspires to violate any law is guilty of a penitentiary offense. Did not the Postmaster General give out an announcement that after consultation with his cohorts they had concluded to violate the law which required names to be sent to the United States Senate? He openly defied the law. He said, "Not only have I decided to violate it, but there has been set forth, in effect, a conspiracy which has been arranged between myself and my cohorts by which we have decided not to violate 1 law, but 2 laws, 10 laws, 100 laws, a thousand laws." If there ever was a criminal conspiracy which had 10,000 or 100,000 violations hung onto it, it has been this proposition not to send names to the United States Senate. We in the Senate have stood for most of it-that is, my colleagues have, and I have had to. I could not help myself, and the majority of my colleagues have had to do what they thought was the best thing, according to their conscience and their good motives, and we have stood for it the best we knew how. Now and then there has been a voice raised against it besides my own, but nothing comes of it. Finally the Supreme Court of the United States, by a unanimous decision, did say that Congress ought to stay in session and legislate a little bit itself. I was really surprised, Mr. President, at the unanimous decision of the Supreme Court of the United States. I did not expect it. I did not anticipate it. I never for the life of me thought that a unanimous decision would come down which I knew ought to come down.”
Page 9105:
(In response to Mr. Lewis pointing out that his “lecture” about the constitution was irrelevant, calling it a “foreign subject”) That is what I was afraid of. I had just made the remark that it was a vanished subject. But we love to talk about the myths of Greece. Grecian mythology is the most engaging of all subjects. Nothing is so interesting as the tale of the wooden horse that was dragged to the gates of Troy.….(Mr. Barkley points out the irrelevancy of Greek mythology) And I do not even know how to read Latin now. I do know some Latin sayings. I got it all for half a dollar in my early life. However, these things which are foreign, these things which are ancient, these things which are more or less a matter of mythology, are engaging, they are enticing, they are interesting. I was speaking of the ancient and forgotten lore of the Constitution. Even love is not more bewitching than a discussion of its vanishing precepts. That is why I bring them up, that I may interest some in them. So for the past hour I have been devoting my remarks to a lecture on the Constitution. As will be recalled by my friend the Senator from Illinois [Mr. Lewis], who either has read all these things about Troy, or helped to write them, I do not know which. [Laughter.] They dragged a wooden horse right up to the gates of Troy, the Greeks made the Trojans a present of him, and the Trojans carried the wooden horse inside. What they did with the horse after they got it inside I do not know but the horse was there, and we have spent a lot of time talking about that wooden horse. It is the best understood thing there is in the schoolroom today, and my only hope now is to interest the young, rising manhood of this country in the forgotten articles of the Constitution of the United States by arousing in their minds an attraction to these things which are mythical, which are vanishing, and which depend upon tradition for their perpetuity. I read further from the Constitution, or what was the Constitution—from this foreign substance: To regulate commerce with foreign nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian tribes. We still have some commerce with the Indian tribes, which is regulated by Congress. We still have that to some extent. For all I know they are bargaining to give the country back to the Indians. There is still some commerce with them. The Government is carrying that on. But as regards commerce between the several States, that has passed out of the hands of Congress so completely that it does not even try to exercise the power at all. As to regulating commerce with foreign nations, the Congress of the United States does not regulate commerce with foreign countries. It does not regulate the exchange with foreign countries. That is handled by the President of the United States. Congress does not regulate the cost of importing and exporting articles. Not a single provision of that article, "To regulate commerce with foreign nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian tribes," has been preserved to Congress except the right to regulate commerce with the Indians. The balance of it is all gone. I shall yield to any Senator who may wish to undertake to controvert that last statement. Do I hear a dissent Hearing none, silence gives consent! To establish a uniform rule of naturalization, and uniform laws on the subject of bankruptcies throughout the United States. Now, what did we do about that? "Uniform bankruptcies throughout the United States." Who is there who read the municipal bankruptcy law? We pass a law under that particular article—if it is still an article of the Constitution— on municipal bankruptey, under which, according to the interpretation which has been given to that law by at least one court about which I know, one class of creditors who have preferred claims have a right to have their claims approved, notwithstanding the fact that the other kind of creditors who may be 25 or 100 times more numerous than are the others, are denied that kind of an adjudication.”
Many hours later:
Page 9122:
“I am now going to excuse all Members of the Senate, Mr. President, who voted against tabling the motion. I am going to agree that they may go. Would it be out of order if I were to ask unanimous consent that all Senators who voted as the Senator from Alabama voted may now go home? I think it is all right for them to go. They can now go ahead and leave. I will take the personal responsibility of every Member of the Senate leaving at this time who voted as the Senator from Alabama voted. They can now go home. That may cause me to lose some of my crowd. I should like to have as large a crowd as possible to remain. Twenty-two Members of the Senate, however, is nothing to be sneezed at. It often happens that there are not that many present in the Chamber and listening to a Senator who is speaking. I doubt whether there are that many now here who know what I have been talking about. The Senator from South Carolina [Mr. Smith] looked at me as though he wanted to say that he did not think I knew what I was talking about myself. Mr. President, at any rate, I think it is too bad that we should continue so long. I think we ought to adjourn. I really think we ought to. I think we should take a little recess and come back and vote on this matter at, say, 12:30 o'clock or 1 o'clock tomorrow. However, I do not want to withdraw my right to withdraw this motion. I would not want that in any unanimous-consent agreement. I will think this thing over tonight and decide by tomorrow, if this unanimous-consent agreement is reached, to withdraw my motion. I will think that over. But, of course, if Senators do not want to do that, and if they want to hear the matter discussed further, we will have to continue. Many of us have dinner engagements. There are many pageants here in the city today; many are going on without the presence of Members of the Senate. Shriners are here from all parts of the United States. Many of them have come here hoping to have the chance, perhaps for the first time or perhaps for the last time, of seeing the distinguished statesmen in the United States, and they are here and there waiting on every corner. The banquet halls are yearning, the dance halls are yawning, the galleries are packed, packed with those who are crying for the presence of Senators, and I should be glad to have every Member of this body attend these functions tonight If they never go again, Mr. President, if they never go to another one I wish they would go tonight. The guests of the city are here, and they want the Senators to attend these functions. "Whosoever will, let him come "—that ought to be changed to "Whosoever will, let him go." That sounds a good deal better. Let them all go. I think it is a discourtesy to many hundreds of people who are here listening that we should continue this way. There are 27,000 Shriners here in this city today There are enough Shriners here to beat any man for reelection from his own State if they took a notion to go against him The Shriners who are here from Texas could defeat my friend from Texas [Mr. Sheppard], who is up for reelection next year, and what a calamity it would be if that should happen, Just think of it, Mr. President. They are all here begging Senators to come and attend these functions. Senators ought to attend them. Mr President, we ought to have a roll call to find out how many Senators have engagements for the evening and now many have appointments. Why not let us adjourn until 2 o'clock in the morning and come back. That would be all right if they want to have a night session. It would be all right with me. I would just as soon meet in the morning as meet in the evening. It does not make any difference to me. Let us, however, not do an unreasonable thing here. It is going to give a bad odor to the Senate if we do not go ahead here and take care of our engagements. Mr. President, as is known, I have considerable social obligations in this city myself.”
”I was writing a book here a few days ago on social etiquette, but never got the time to complete it. I have prepared recipes for many celebrated Louisiana dishes that I was instructing people how to mix and prepare. I was preparing a recipe for a very fine New Orleans salad dressing. I have been asked to attend many important social affairs in this city to instruct people how to prepare that salad dressing. Also, Mr. President, people up in this part of the country never have learned to fry oysters as well as we have done down our way. I have spent a number of evenings acquainting people with how to prepare oysters. I had a bucket of oysters sent to me from Louisiana the other night, and I was asked by a very fine bunch of my friends if I would not drop around with the New Orleans oysters and fry some of them for them in good Louisiana style and way. So, Mr. President, I bought a frying pan about 8 inches deep. I bought the frying pan because I was afraid they would not have a frying pan there in which I could fry the oysters. I bought a frying pan, as I said, 8 inches deep and about 17 inches in diameter.” (In response to Mr. Tydings asking if Potlikkers were mixed in with the clams) “No; that does not go in with the oysters. I will come to that later. I am coming to that because I am going to have my remarks taken down and a copy made and sent out to the several places where I was supposed to go this evening in order that these recipes and directions may be had by those people, and I will ask the stenographer that as soon as possible he give me at least seven extra copies of these recipes which I dictate into the record so that I may have them for ready circulation in case we do not have an early adjournment. As I was going to illustrate, Mr. President, about these oysters that I got from New Orleans. I bought this frying pan 8 inches deep and 14 to 16 inches or 17 inches in diameter, and I bought a 10-pound bucket of cottonseed-oil lard, but I forgot to get a strainer, and when I got to the place to fry the oysters I had everything there except the meal and the strainer. The lady had some meal, but she did not have any salt to salt the meal with, and that was the only bad thing about it. The strainer which they had was not the best strainer in the world, but I could use it all right. However, they had no salt for the meal, but I took the oysters, Mr. President, the way they should be taken, and laid them out on a muslin cloth, about 12 of them, and then you pull the cloth over and you dry the oysters. You dry them, you see, first with a muslin cloth, and then you take the oysters, after they have been dried, and you roll them into a meal which is salted. I did not have it salted this night, but it should have been salted. [Laughter in the galleries.] Mr. President, you roll these oysters in the dry meal. You do not want to cook the meal or put water in the meal at any time or anything like that. Just salt the meal and roll the oysters in it. Then, let the grease get boiling hot. You want the grease about 6 inches deep. Then you take the oysters and you place the oysters in the strainer, and you put the strainer in the grease, full depth down to the bot-tom. Then, you fry those oysters in boiling grease until they turn a gold-copper color and rise to the top, and then, you take them out and let them cool just a little bit before you eat them. Now, Mr. President, most people cannot tell when an oyster is done. They do not know when it has been fried enough. You wrongfully put them on the bottom of a skillet. You have got to have them totally submerged and you wait until they rise to the top, and when they rise to the top, a golden-copper color, then the oyster is cooked just exactly right, and then you take the strainer up out of the grease in the dish and the oysters are there and you let them drip for a little while and allow them to cool a little and then you eat them.” [1]
Several hours later, Huey Long received a “call of nature“ and left; the proposal was defeated shortly after.
[1] Yes, Huey Long actually did shoehorn a recipe for fried oysters into his filibuster.
Huge thanks to FriendlyGhost!
Last edited: