Final answer:
The Senate, with longer terms and broader representation, operates with more flexible procedures like endless debate and unanimous consent, while the House has stricter rules reflecting the urgency of its two-year elections. The Senate's ability to extend debate and require supermajority consent allows it to be a check on the House's partisanship and rapid legislative turnover.
Step-by-step explanation:
The Senate and the House of Representatives have distinct procedures for conducting legislative business, partially due to their structural differences. In terms of regular order, the House operates with a more strict set of rules facilitated by strong leadership due to the high frequency of elections which demand accountability to constituents. The Senate, benefiting from longer six-year terms and representing broader state interests, allows for more flexible procedures, including extended debate times and the use of filibusters to influence legislation.
Unanimous consent is a procedure used in both chambers but has particular importance in the Senate to expedite the legislative process in the absence of formal time constraints. Without unanimous agreement, Senate rules enable individual members to significantly slow down or halt legislation through extended debate. In contrast, the House can waive certain rules by unanimous consent, but generally operates under tighter restrictions, including time limits on debates, to accommodate its larger number of members and more frequent legislative turnover.
Session cadence also differs, with the House requiring a quorum more often due to the higher turnover of legislation reflective of the immediate interests of their constituencies. The Senate, featuring a smaller membership and longer terms, can afford to function with more flexibility, allowing broader and more in-depth consideration of legislation. Together, these procedural differences enable the Senate to serve as a check on the swift changes and partisanship often present in the House.