Our democracy is rooted in the principle of freedom of speech, and by extension, the right to express one's opinion over the important (or unimportant) issues of the day. Yet, Americans generally seem to take the concept of debate for granted. The only debates which regularly receive wide media exposure are those of the Presidential candidates every four years in the autumn months leading up to that election. There are, however, many other important debates which cry out for more coverage, as they are perhaps even more influential upon our everyday lives. Congressional debates on bills or concerns before the two respective houses provide more information and better examination of the issues than sound bites tossed back and forth by candidates for President before an audience of millions. The House of Representatives and the Senate, however, provide different methods of debating those issues.

Debate is the process by which two (or more) opposing sides on a motion, bill, or issue state their views within a certain format. There are a number of parliamentarian practices to follow which are generally standard amongst most organized societies. After a motion has been made and seconded, then repeated by the chairman, the floor is opened to debate. Members speaking are to address themselves to the chair, using the appropriate title. A common courtesy is to allow the person who made the motion to speak first upon its merits. The number of times one may speak is also limited, generally to no more than two occasions, and within a predetermined time frame. Before a member may speak a second time1 however, all people who wished to speak a first time must be given that chance. Debate may not end as long as someone wishes to speak, except as voted upon by the assembly on the motions of objecting to the consideration of a question, laying the motion on the table, calling for the previous question, or limiting or closing the debate by special order.

Members of an organization are also expected to behave with a modicum of decorum while debating. While a debate is engaged, disruptions, such as whispering or excessive movement, are not permitted. When speaking, one should confine themselves to the question before the assembly. Motives of those introducing the measure should not be questioned, but consequences of its adoption may be attacked with strong language. Not too strong, however; if offensive language (i.e. profanity) is used by a member, the assembly may act. If the member cannot justify their language, or does not apologize for it, punitive action can be taken.

Variances in the aforementioned practices governing debate invariably differ between societies, as we can see in the House of Representatives. A measure does not become ready for consideration until after it has been reported by committee, although there are some circumstances in which it may be brought directly to the floor. For the House to consider a measure, it may be governed by a "rule," which is passed by the entire body to specify how the debate is to be carried out. These include how much time may be taken for debate, whether or not amendments may be offered, as well as other considerations. Time for debate is divided between those for the measure and those against it. Each side will yield time to those who desire to speak on the bill before the assembly. Any amendments proposed will also be debated and voted upon. When debate has concluded and amendments added or defeated, the House votes on final passage of the motion. Opponents may attempt to send the bill back to committee, in hopes of changing it or laying it on the table, but if this is foiled, a final vote is taken.

The Senate, by contrast, has a much more formal code for debate, with no less than eight specific rules governing its use. When a Senator wants to speak, they rise and address the Presiding Officer. He or she cannot continue without being formally recognized, which occurs in the order of members addressing the presiding officer. Senators cannot interrupt another without their consent, and tb receive that permission, they must first address the presiding officer. Following normal parliamentary procedure, Senators are prohibited from speaking more that two times on any one particular question on the same legislative day without leave of the Senate, which is determined with no debate.

Further Senate restrictions deal with what members are banned from stating after obtaining the floor. They cannot accuse one another of conduct or motives supposedly beneath a Senator, nor may they denigrate any state in the country. If a colleague speaks in a profane or objectionable manner, the exceptionable words are to be written down and read at the table to inform the Senate as to the nature of the offense. When the presiding officer is of the opinion that a member has violated the rules, he or she may, of their own volition or by request, call that member to order. Following this, the Senator is ordered to be seated, and cannot proceed further in the debate without permission of the Senate. A motion must be made to allow them to proceed, which is either adopted or rejected without debate. Senators directed to take their seat, on the other hand, are within their rights to appeal, which is open to general debate.

Other restrictions deal with disruptions and observers in the gallery. If some sort of disturbance were to take place, such as expressions of approval or disapproval, the Chair is expected to enforce order on their own, and needs no prompting with a motion on point of order by Senators. Members speaking before the assembly may not refer to anyone in the galleries either, and this rule cannot be rescinded under any circumstances. Finally, former Presidents are permitted to address the Senate, after they have given due notice, and appropriate arrangements been carried out.

Although Robert's Rules of Orders provide an important guide to the principles governing organized societies, it is up to the leadership and members of those societies to determine their own unique practices within this framework. In the area of debate, it is abundantly clear that each house of Congress has decided what sort of format works best for it. Debate will remain important to discussing the merits or disadvantages of adopting certain policies, and ensuring that all legitimate voices are heard in a dignified, organized manner. Debating does not just have to be about entertainment, or who can express themselves the best; it should be about finding the truth, and adopting the best policies to facilitate a better future.