Note! Senate leaders can discharge a committee from consideration of nominee

[Pretzel_Warrior]

In other words, after nominee has been referred to relevant committee, even if the committee is not able to vote and report their recommendation to full senate, the nominee can be brought to the floor and a vote made on whether to place this on Senate Calendar.

Looks like Republicans are fucked. Their failure to allow a quorum in committee will only create minor delays. It will not adversely hold up nominees from full consideration and vote by the senate for months.


http://tinyurl.com/Senaterules0nDU

[Cali_Democrat]

1. Suck it GOPers

You obstructionist, vile, racist pieces of shit.

[CaliforniaPeggy]

2. That's good!

And we can use their intransigence as a tool in campaigning.

[passiveporcupine]

22. Hell yes!

[Tx4obama]

3. On which page of that pdf did you find that ?

[Pretzel_Warrior]

5. Pages 6 and 7

[Tx4obama]

7. Text below

-snip-
Although very few nominations proceed without the support of a committee, chamber rules make it possible for the full Senate to consider a nomination a committee does not report. Technically, Senate Rule XVII permits any Senator to submit a motion or resolution that a committee be discharged from the consideration of a subject referred to it. A motion to discharge a committee from the consideration of a nomination is, like all business concerning nominations, in order only in executive session. If there is an objection to the motion to discharge, it must lie over until the next executive session on another day. It is fairly common for committees to be discharged from noncontroversial nominations by unanimous consent, often with the support of the committee, as
a means of simplifying the process. It is far less common for Senators to attempt to discharge a committee from a nomination by motion or resolution.
-snip-
http://www.senate.gov/CRSReports/crs-publish.cfm?pid=%270E%2C*P\%3F3%22P%20%20%0A

[Pretzel_Warrior]

8. Thanks. This is why GOP are so mad about rules change. They are screwn!!111

[Tx4obama]

26. Hold on a minute. A motion or resolution would have to have 60 votes for cloture right?

Or does this fall under the 'new rule' ?

The new rule is 'limited' so what does the text of the rule change say?

Something to think about.

[Pretzel_Warrior]

36. We'll see how it works out...but one would imagine any vote directly related to

Getting a full senate vote on President's nominees should no longer require 60 votes for cloture.

[annabanana]

4. good to know...

Thanks, and rec

[sheshe2]

6. K&R

Thanks, PW~

[Cha]

9. They have been fucking begging for this. And,

"republicons fucked".. you mean like they've been doing to Dems all these years?

thanks PW

[Major Hogwash]

10. Well, the Senate Rethuglicans got what they wanted . . a kick to the lower extremities.

I hope the Senate Rethuglicans now realize just how much they deserved it, too.

[Cha]

13. Do bullies ever realize how much they

deserve to be taken to task?

Would an historical context help them out?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024071700

[Major Hogwash]

30. Naw, not Rethuglicans. Not until they lose their job in Congress!

Then they hold press conferences and cry about losing their own election and blame it on the liberal media.

[Cha]

31. Yeah, they're so vacuous.

[Pretzel_Warrior]

14. The difference between McConnell and his constituents....he knows

What an asshole he's being, but he gets paid a lot by corporations to do so. His constituents are mostly clueless and submit easily to corporate and partisan propaganda.

[Pretzel_Warrior]

11. You're welcome. Impotent rage is some of the funniest stuff around

[freshwest]

15. I WANT the 3 just filibustered to be nominated right away!

They are all excellent choices, as indicated by Warren here:

Thanks Harry and Elizabeth

[Pretzel_Warrior]

16. They will be confirmed swiftly since they are out of committee already!

[freshwest]

18. Great news. Now pack the courts with impartial judges. It's a last resort for justice.

[Tx4obama]

20. They have already been 'nominated' - I think you meant 'confirmed'

[freshwest]

25. I wasn't sure if they would have to be 'nominated' again as if they'd been totally dropped.

Naturally, I'm aiming at them getting confirmed, but didn't know if the filibuster ruined their chances. A vote certainly would, but the Democrats will stand strong and keep voting them in. Nothing wrong about that - they are doing their jobs!

[Tx4obama]

29. They had not been dropped. All three are out of committee waiting for a full senate vote.

There have been cloture votes on Millet, Pillard, and Wilkins that did not pass the full senate in the past - but Reid changed his vote from yes to no
in order to bring the nominees to the full senate floor again in the future.


Then today Reid brought the cloture vote for Millet to the floor again for reconsideration of cloture and it passed 55-43
now there will be 30 hour of debate on that one.
http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=113&session=1&vote=00244

[malaise]

17. Important post

Rec

[cilla4progress]

19. Excellent - so glad you found that. Congratulations!

I'm not naive enough to think the Rs won't continue to work on ways to sabotage the Senate and Dem control there. But every triumph matters. And I'm glad Reid decided to focus on now, instead of some future what-if. That strategy was going nowhere! Anyway, if we can fill courts with Pres O's appointments, that's a big help in the long run! I'm sure Pres O is VERY relieved and happy!

[Politicub]

21. Nice! You shall now be known as Harry, Jr. to me

with your masterful understanding of Senate Rules!

[Pretzel_Warrior]

24. Lol. Harry Doggonit Jr.

[spanone]

23. they brought it upon themselves by blocking government from governing.....

[lastlib]

27. !! **SWEETEST** words I have EVER heard in my LIFE!!

[font size = 8]Looks like Republicans are fucked.

[font size]
[font size=2]
. . . . . . .

. . . . . . .

. . . . . . .

. . . . . . .

.

"Play it again, Sam!"

[grasswire]

28. Is the ATF position still empty?

There have been many positions aside from judgeships that have been obstructed by Pugs.

[Tx4obama]

32. Here is another HUGE possible problem: 'blue slips'

IF both senators from a state do not turn in their 'blue slips' then the nominee will not get a 'hearing'.

And without a hearing a really doubt that the nominee would be brought to the floor.

Or is the blue slip phase after the hearing and before the committee vote?

I think it is 'before' they get a hearing.

Anyone know for sure?


Edited to add...

Article on link below regarding 'blue slips'

Senator Leahy and the Blue Slips

Here: http://www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2013/03/senator-leahy-and-blue-slips

AND also...

-snip-
The rules change will not lead to an immediate flood of judges, however, as Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.), chairman of the Judiciary Committee, observes what's known as the "blue slip rule," a tradition in the committee that allows senators to advance or block judicial nominees from their home state. Republicans are currently refusing to submit blue slips for four nominees pending in the committee, effectively stalling their entire confirmation process. And they could use that same rule to block others in committee.

The rules change has repercussions for what's known as the "hold," where a senator threatens to filibuster unless some related or unrelated demand is met. Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.), for instance, was holding Yellen's nomination while demanding an audit of the Federal Reserve.

With filibusters on nominees now easier to overcome, a hold has less power, though it can still slow down the process.

-snip-

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/11/21/senate-filibuster_n_4319665.html

[Pretzel_Warrior]

34. Those are merely traditions and courtesies

Considering what a bunch of discourteous fucks Repukes have shown themselves to be, maybe Leahy dispenses with that. He did vote yea on the filibuster rules change.

[Tx4obama]

35. Did you notice this part of the Mother Jones article...

-snip-

2003: Republicans win back control of the Senate. They up the ante by effectively moving to a zero blue-slip rule: they'll allow hearings on nominees even if no senators return blue-slips. Democrats threaten to filibuster over this rather obvious abuse of power and insist on a return to the two blue-slip rule.

2007-Present: Democrats win control of the Senate and Pat Leahy of Vermont becomes chairman of the Judiciary Committe. Leahy is a traditionalist who maintains the two blue-slip rule.

-snip-

http://www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2013/03/senator-leahy-and-blue-slips

Might be hard for him to change his mind now

[Pretzel_Warrior]

37. I did. Republican intransigence for the past few years might have changed his mind

we shall see.

[Arugula Latte]

33. ...

[William769]

38. Kick & recommended.