HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » Latest Breaking News (Forum) » Senate to vote next week ...

Sat Mar 6, 2021, 07:59 PM

Senate to vote next week on Garland's AG nomination

Source: The Hill

Senate Majority Leader Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.) laid the groundwork for the next tranche of President Biden's Cabinet picks, including Garland's nomination to be attorney general.

Under the schedule laid out by Schumer, the Senate could take an initial vote on Garland's nomination as soon as Tuesday.

The votes come after Garland's nomination was delayed amid roadblocks from Republicans. Democrats had hoped to confirm Garland this week after voting him 15-7 out of the Senate Judiciary Committee on Monday.

Sen. Tom Cotton (R-Ark.), a member of the committee who is viewed as a potential 2024 contender, disclosed in a string of tweets that he was objecting to speeding up Garland's nomination.

Read more: https://thehill.com/homenews/administration/541955-senate-to-vote-next-week-on-garlands-ag-nomination






I know everyone likes to complain that Senator Schumer isn’t Harry Reid or that he’s not tough enough or that he’s not good at his job of Democratic leader, but the reality is he’s a strategic thinker, he picks his fights, and when he has the opportunities he takes them. Senator Van Hollen didn’t just stumble into advancing the American Recovery Act yesterday morning, he was there because Senator Schumer had a trusted agent in place to take advantage of Senator Johnson and the other Republican senators caring more about the optics of their stunt to slow down its passage than actually slowing down its passage. Schumer knew, because he knows his Republican colleagues, that as soon as they could flee the Senate floor to relieve themselves, get something to eat, or get some sleep that they would. And that would give him an opening to put the ARA back on track. His invoking cloture as soon as the ARA passed and the Republican senators filed out is the same type of tactic.

Merrick Garland’s nomination to be Attorney General will now proceed. Senator Cotton just got screwed on live television.

https://www.balloon-juice.com/2021/03/06/breaking-senate-majority-leader-schumer-has-advanced-merrick-garlands-nomination-to-a-final-vote/

11 replies, 2125 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread

Response to muriel_volestrangler (Original post)

Sat Mar 6, 2021, 08:02 PM

1. The Republicans would object to Jesus Christ being nominated for AG.

A DOJ headed by anyone not a Republican is bad news for the Party.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to muriel_volestrangler (Original post)

Sat Mar 6, 2021, 08:06 PM

2. I think people are confused about what happened today

At the end of the session Majority Leader put forth several motions related to scheduling votes on Biden nominees next week. These included Garland (AG), Fudge (HUD) and Regan (EPA). He introduced cloture motions for each and I believe they will be voted on Tuesday. If successful the confirmation votes will happen Wednesday. There was nothing nefarious or clever going on here. He is just moving things along as quickly as possible.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hokie (Reply #2)

Sun Mar 7, 2021, 09:56 AM

3. bs - it was very clever and very strategic....

This isn't just something you can do on the fly. He had to submit his request in writing. He had it prepared and ready, waiting like a sniper for his shot.

This was not normal business. If he didn't do what he did in a very brief period of time, there would be no vote at all this week.

Schumer pulled a rabbit out of his hat. Give him credit.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to getagrip_already (Reply #3)

Sun Mar 7, 2021, 12:04 PM

5. +1 K&R. I'm of the thinking that now that Shumer has learned his lesson that if he concedes an inch

to Moscow Mitch that they'll play dirty regardless. So best that he ups his game and don't give them any room to be obstructionists.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to getagrip_already (Reply #3)

Sun Mar 7, 2021, 12:34 PM

6. You are overselling this

Garland's confirmation will require two votes. That's because Tom Cotton is using a technical filibuster to force the second vote on cloture. That will happen Tuesday. Schumer Saturday was going through the formal process of laying out the schedule for this week - cloture vote on Tuesday and confirmation vote on Wednesday. Cloture for executive nominees requires 60 votes. Every indication is that will be the case.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hokie (Reply #6)

Sun Mar 7, 2021, 12:42 PM

7. He actually called for cloture on the garland nomination....

Cloture is done for garland. He will now get a formal up and down vote. The fillibuster is formally over. That is what he slipped in.

You are correct for the other two, but garland s done. Hearing no objections, the move was approved. No republicans were there to object. Not chucks problem, his opportunity.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hokie (Reply #2)

Sun Mar 7, 2021, 11:50 AM

4. I posted from the CSPAN transcript here--

https://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=15196533

From the CSPAN2 transcript - https://www.c-span.org/video/?509591-1/senate-passes-19-trillion-covid-19-relief-bill-50-49&live&vod

Chuck Schumer

I SEND A CLOTURE MOTION TO THE DESK.
27:30:49


THE CLERK WILL REPORT THE CLOTURE MOTION.

CLOTURE MOTION, WE, THE UNDERSIGNED SENATORS, IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PROVISIONS OF RULE 22 OF THE STANDING RULES OF THE SENATE DO HEREBY MOVE TO BRING TO A CLOSE DEBATE ON THE NOMINATION OF EXECUTIVE CALENDAR NUMBER 12, MARCIA LOUISE FUDGE OF OHIO, TO BE SECRETARY OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT, SIGNED BY 16 SENATORS AS FOLLOWS.

(snip)

Chuck Schumer

MR. PRESIDENT, I ASK UNANIMOUS CONSENT THAT ON TUESDAY, MARCH 9, AT 5:30 P.M., CLOTURE RIPEN ON CALENDAR NUMBER 12, MARCIA LOUISE FUDGE, AND EXECUTIVE CALENDAR 27, MERRICK BRIAN GARLAND, THAT THE SENATE VOTE CLOTURE ON THE MARCIA LOUISE FUDGE AND THAT THE TIME EXPIRE ON MARCH 10 AT 12 NOON, FOLLOWING THE CLOTURE VOTE ON THE FUDGE NOMINATION, THE SENATE VOTE ON THE GARL NOMINATION AND -- GARLAND NOMINATION. FURTHER, THAT CLOTURE ON THE REGAN NOMINATION RIPEN FOLLOWING DISPOSITION OF THE GARLAND NOMINATION.

(snip)

Chuck Schumer

MR. PRESIDENT, FOR THE INFORMATION OF SENATORS, THE SENATE WILL NOT BE IN SESSION ON MONDAY, MARCH 8. ON TUESDAY THERE WILL BE TWO ROLL CALL VOTES AT 5:30 P.M., THE FIRST VOTE WILL BE TO INVOKE CLOTURE ON THE FUDGE NOMINATION TO BE SECRETARY OF H.U.D., FOLLOWED BY THE GARLAND NOMINATION TO BE ATTORNEY GENERAL. IF THERE'S NO FURTHER BUSINESS TO COME BEFORE THE SENATE, I ASK THAT IT STAND ADJOURNED UNDER THE PREVIOUS ORDER.


The last remarks that Schumer made before adjourning (according to the CSPAN transcript) was that there would be "2 roll call votes" on Tuesday - one to invoke cloture (motion to proceed) on the Fudge (HUD) nomination but the other appears to be the actual vote for the AG (Garland) nomination AFTER they do the cloture vote for Fudge. Those votes were expected to happen at 5:30pm ET on Tuesday, where the Senate was expected to come into session - I guess for "Morning Business" at 3 pm Tuesday (PDF), where time-wasting crap by Cancun Cruz will occur until the scheduled votes.

And then on Wednesday, the actual nomination vote for Fudge will happen, and the cloture vote (and possibly the final vote) for Regan (EPA) were expected to occur (would have to see if there are updates on Tuesday regarding the final Wednesday schedule).

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BumRushDaShow (Reply #4)

Sun Mar 7, 2021, 12:46 PM

8. it looks to be you are correct - they ended debate on garland....

Formally voting for cloture, or an end to debate.

He now moves to a full vote with no more debate. Meaning the filibuster is over under unanimous consent (no gop troll was awake under the bridge and the travelers passed unmolested)....

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to getagrip_already (Reply #8)

Sun Mar 7, 2021, 01:12 PM

9. There are two votes on cloture on Tuesday for Fudge AND Garland beginning at 5:30 PM

Here is the log of what happened Saturday at the end of the session: (Read from the bottom up)

Friday March 5/Saturday March 6, 2021

1:04 p.m. The Senate adjourned until 3 p.m. Tuesday, March 9. Cloture votes at 5:30 p.m. on Fudge and Garland.

12:33 p.m. ML Schumer filed cloture on nomination of Michael Stanley Regan, of North Carolina, to be Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency.

12:32 p.m. ML Schumer filed cloture on the nomination of Merrick Garland, of Maryland, to be Attorney General.

12:30 p.m. ML Schumer has filed cloture on the nomination of Marcia Fudge, of Ohio, to be Secretary of Housing and Urban Development.

12:24 p.m. The Senate passed H.R. 1319, American Rescue Plan, as amended by a tally of 50-49.

https://www.dailypress.senate.gov/

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hokie (Reply #9)

Sun Mar 7, 2021, 02:39 PM

10. I believe these cloture votes will require only a simple majority

In 2013 the cloture rules were changed and only 51 votes are required to end a filibuster on nominees.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hokie (Reply #9)

Sun Mar 7, 2021, 04:31 PM

11. I think what the point of confusion is and what the point of the OP article might be is this ---

(and I remember a bunch of years ago when this issue came up before and there were attempts to modify the Rule and you may already know this)

Apparently Tom Cotton put a "Hold" on Garland's nomination. What that meant was that even if they tried to move with a motion for cloture, he could essentially delay it ("filibuster" ) it by objecting until he got his concerns addressed. The GOP argued that Democrats did the same with Barr's nomination.

In the past, Senators used to do what were dubbed "secret holds" where all of a sudden, stuff ground to a halt (notably nominations) and "no one" knew who did it. It's one of those arcane rules like the "Blue Slips" (where the Senators from a particular state can weigh in about judicial nominees from their state with a yay or a nay via that "blue slip" form), something that Turtle essentially started ignoring during the latter part of his tenure when he was busy packing the courts instead of considering legislation from the House.

Holds

A hold is a request by a Senator to his or her party leader to prevent or delay action on a nomination or a bill. Holds are not mentioned in the rules or precedents of the Senate, and they are enforced only through the agenda decisions of party leaders. A standing order of the Senate aims to ensure that any Senator who places a hold on any matter (including a nomination) make public his or her objection to the matter.31

Senators have placed holds on nominations for a number of reasons. One common purpose is to give a Senator more time to review a nomination or to consult with the nominee. Senators may also place holds because they disagree with the policy positions of the nominee. Senators have also admitted to using holds in order to gain concessions from the executive branch on matters not directly related to the nomination.

The Senate precedents reducing the threshold necessary to invoke cloture on nominations, and the recent precedent reducing the time necessary for a cloture process, could affect the practice of holds. In some sense, holds are connected to the Senate traditions of mutual deference, since they may have originated as requests for more time to examine a pending nomination or bill. The effectiveness of a hold, however, ultimately has been grounded in the power of the Senator placing the hold to filibuster the nomination and the difficulty of invoking cloture to overcome a filibuster. Invoking cloture is now easier because the support of fewer Senators is necessary, and in most cases, the floor time required for a cloture process is less. The large number of nominations submitted by the President for Senate consideration, however, might still lead Senators to seek unanimous consent to quickly approve nominations.

https://www.everycrsreport.com/reports/RL31980.html#_Toc5969592


AND

“Holds” in the Senate

May 22, 2014 – January 24, 2017 R43563

The Senate “hold” is an informal practice whereby Senators communicate to Senate leaders, often in the form of a letter, their policy views and scheduling preferences regarding measures and matters available for floor consideration. Unique to the upper chamber, holds can be understood as information-sharing devices predicated on the unanimous consent nature of Senate decision-making. Senators place holds to accomplish a variety of purposes—to receive notification of upcoming legislative proceedings, for instance, or to express objections to a particular proposal or executive nomination—but ultimately the decision to honor a hold request, and for how long, rests with the majority leader. Scheduling Senate business is the fundamental prerogative of the majority leader, and this responsibility is typically carried out in consultation with the minority leader.

The influence that holds exert in chamber deliberations is based primarily upon the significant parliamentary prerogatives individual Senators are afforded in the rules, procedures, and precedents of the chamber. More often than not, Senate leaders honor a hold request because not doing so could trigger a range of parliamentary responses from the holding Senator(s), such as a filibuster, that could expend significant amounts of scarce floor time. As such, efforts to regulate holds are inextricably linked with the chamber’s use of unanimous consent agreements to structure the process of calling up measures and matters for floor debate and amendment.

https://www.everycrsreport.com/reports/R43563.html


There's a whole bunch of info out there on the "hold" but suffice it to say, they normally would have reluctantly accommodated his nonsense... But what Schumer apparently did, by waiving the need for a quorum in the chamber at the time, and holding a voice vote of what seems to have been just himself (I think almost everyone if not everyone had cleared out), he shunted aside, without objection, Cotton's "hold" (and expected "floor show" ), and went forward with scheduling the timing for cloture and votes.

THIS is how it played out -

https://www.c-span.org/video/?c4950418/user-clip-merrick-garland-cloture


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread