Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Senate ends practice of secret holds (vote 92-4)

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU
 
Tx4obama Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 05:44 PM
Original message
Senate ends practice of secret holds (vote 92-4)
Source: The Hill

The Senate kicked off a series of stacked votes that would alter the Senate rules for the 112th Congress with a 92-4 vote to end the practice of secret holds.

This legislation deals with a sweeping, almost unparalleled power, Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) said on the floor prior to the vote. If you want to exercise that extraordinary power, you ought to do it in the sunlight.

Secret holds allowed a senator to anonymously object to legislation or the approval of a nominee.

Although Senate leadership already agreed to stop the practice of secret holds in a gentlemans agreement Thursday morning, the passage of Res. 28, the Wyden/Grassley/McCaskill Secret Holds Resolution, will codify the change and will apply to future sessions of Congress.

Read more: http://thehill.com/blogs/floor-action/senate/140811-senate-ends-practice-of-secret-holds
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Tx4obama Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 05:49 PM
Response to Original message
1. The 'no' votes were....
Jim DeMint - R-SC
John Ensign - R-NV
Mike Lee - R-UT
Rand Paul - R-KY




Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Broderick Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 05:50 PM
Response to Reply #1
3. must be good then
the crazy faction contingent was tiny.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
yurbud Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 10:47 PM
Response to Reply #1
20. who were the no votes on ending or amending the filibuster itself?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tx4obama Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 10:58 PM
Response to Reply #20
21. Here ya go
S.RES.8
Latest Title: A resolution amending the Standing Rules of the Senate to provide for cloture to be invoked with less than a three-fifths majority after additional debate.
List of yeas and nays:
http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=112&session=1&vote=00004

S.RES.10
Latest Title: A resolution to improve the debate and consideration of legislative matters and nominations in the Senate.
List of yeas and nays:
http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=112&session=1&vote=00005

Look at January 27th: http://democrats.senate.gov/calendar/2011-01.html


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
No Elephants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-28-11 01:29 AM
Response to Reply #21
25. For non-clickers
S.RES.8 - Latest Title: A resolution amending the Standing Rules of the Senate to provide for cloture to be invoked with less than a three-fifths majority after additional debate.

Grouped By Vote Position (very surprising to me)

YEAs ---12
Begich (D-AK)
Blumenthal (D-CT)
Durbin (D-IL)
Gillibrand (D-NY)
Harkin (D-IA)
Kerry (D-MA)
Kohl (D-WI)
Lautenberg (D-NJ)
Lieberman (ID-CT)
Mikulski (D-MD)
Shaheen (D-NH)
Udall (D-NM)

NAYs ---84
Akaka (D-HI)
Alexander (R-TN)
Ayotte (R-NH)
Barrasso (R-WY)
Baucus (D-MT)
Bennet (D-CO)
Bingaman (D-NM)
Blunt (R-MO)
Boozman (R-AR)
Boxer (D-CA)
Brown (D-OH)
Brown (R-MA)
Burr (R-NC)
Cantwell (D-WA)
Cardin (D-MD)
Carper (D-DE)
Casey (D-PA)
Chambliss (R-GA)
Coats (R-IN)
Coburn (R-OK)
Cochran (R-MS)
Collins (R-ME)
Conrad (D-ND)
Coons (D-DE)
Corker (R-TN)
Cornyn (R-TX)
Crapo (R-ID)
DeMint (R-SC)
Ensign (R-NV)
Enzi (R-WY)
Franken (D-MN)
Graham (R-SC)
Grassley (R-IA)
Hagan (D-NC)
Hatch (R-UT)
Hoeven (R-ND)
Inhofe (R-OK)
Isakson (R-GA)
Johanns (R-NE)
Johnson (D-SD)
Johnson (R-WI)
Kirk (R-IL)
Klobuchar (D-MN)
Kyl (R-AZ)
Landrieu (D-LA)
Leahy (D-VT)
Lee (R-UT)
Levin (D-MI)
Lugar (R-IN)
Manchin (D-WV)
McCaskill (D-MO)
McConnell (R-KY)
Menendez (D-NJ)
Merkley (D-OR)
Moran (R-KS)
Murkowski (R-AK)
Murray (D-WA)
Nelson (D-FL)
Nelson (D-NE)
Paul (R-KY)
Portman (R-OH)
Pryor (D-AR)
Reed (D-RI)
Reid (D-NV)
Risch (R-ID)
Roberts (R-KS)
Rockefeller (D-WV)
Rubio (R-FL)
Sanders (I-VT)
Schumer (D-NY)
Sessions (R-AL)
Shelby (R-AL)
Snowe (R-ME)
Stabenow (D-MI)
Tester (D-MT)
Thune (R-SD)
Toomey (R-PA)
Udall (D-CO)
Vitter (R-LA)
Warner (D-VA)
Webb (D-VA)
Whitehouse (D-RI)
Wicker (R-MS)
Wyden (D-OR)

Not Voting - 4
Feinstein (D-CA)
Hutchison (R-TX)
Inouye (D-HI)
McCain (R-AZ)







S.RES.10
Latest Title: A resolution to improve the debate and consideration of legislative matters and nominations in the Senate.

Grouped By Vote Position

YEAs ---44
Akaka (D-HI)
Begich (D-AK)
Bennet (D-CO)
Bingaman (D-NM)
Blumenthal (D-CT)
Boxer (D-CA)
Brown (D-OH)
Cantwell (D-WA)
Cardin (D-MD)
Carper (D-DE)
Casey (D-PA)
Conrad (D-ND)
Coons (D-DE)
Durbin (D-IL)
Franken (D-MN)
Gillibrand (D-NY)
Hagan (D-NC)
Harkin (D-IA)
Johnson (D-SD)
Klobuchar (D-MN)
Landrieu (D-LA)
Lautenberg (D-NJ)
Leahy (D-VT)
Levin (D-MI)
Lieberman (ID-CT)
Manchin (D-WV)
McCaskill (D-MO)
Menendez (D-NJ)
Merkley (D-OR)
Mikulski (D-MD)
Murray (D-WA)
Nelson (D-FL)
Nelson (D-NE)
Rockefeller (D-WV)
Sanders (I-VT)
Schumer (D-NY)
Shaheen (D-NH)
Stabenow (D-MI)
Tester (D-MT)
Udall (D-CO)
Udall (D-NM)
Warner (D-VA)
Whitehouse (D-RI)
Wyden (D-OR)

NAYs ---51
Alexander (R-TN)
Ayotte (R-NH)
Barrasso (R-WY)
Baucus (D-MT)
Blunt (R-MO)
Boozman (R-AR)
Brown (R-MA)
Burr (R-NC)
Chambliss (R-GA)
Coats (R-IN)
Coburn (R-OK)
Cochran (R-MS)
Collins (R-ME)
Corker (R-TN)
Cornyn (R-TX)
Crapo (R-ID)
DeMint (R-SC)
Ensign (R-NV)
Enzi (R-WY)
Graham (R-SC)
Grassley (R-IA)
Hatch (R-UT)
Hoeven (R-ND)
Inhofe (R-OK)
Isakson (R-GA)
Johanns (R-NE)
Johnson (R-WI)
Kirk (R-IL)
Kohl (D-WI)
Kyl (R-AZ)
Lee (R-UT)
Lugar (R-IN)
McConnell (R-KY)
Moran (R-KS)
Murkowski (R-AK)
Paul (R-KY)
Portman (R-OH)
Pryor (D-AR)
Reed (D-RI)
Reid (D-NV)
Risch (R-ID)
Roberts (R-KS)
Rubio (R-FL)
Sessions (R-AL)
Shelby (R-AL)
Snowe (R-ME)
Thune (R-SD)
Toomey (R-PA)
Vitter (R-LA)
Webb (D-VA)
Wicker (R-MS)

Not Voting - 5
Feinstein (D-CA)
Hutchison (R-TX)
Inouye (D-HI)
Kerry (D-MA)
McCain (R-AZ)



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
deminks Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 05:49 PM
Response to Original message
2. a small step, but a step, nonetheless.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Warpy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 05:51 PM
Response to Original message
4. Well, a tippy toe extended for progress.
Edited on Thu Jan-27-11 05:52 PM by Warpy
But it seems like they're not going to touch the abuse of the filibuster this time.

However, forcing cockroaches like DeMint out into the light will help.

It will be interesting to see who voted against it. I'm expecting at least one progressive because it didn't end indefinite public holds.

Edit: I see the "nays" posted above. I sit corrected. Gratefully.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tx4obama Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 05:52 PM
Response to Original message
5. ALSO one more bill passed.... (Updated with 3 failed bills)
Edited on Thu Jan-27-11 06:31 PM by Tx4obama
PASSED
S.Res.29 (Udall (CO)), to permit the waiving of the reading of an amendment if the text and adequate notice are provided (60-vote threshold); Adopted: 81-15

http://democrats.senate.gov/calendar/2011-01.html
and yays and nays here: http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=112&session=1&vote=00003

-------------

And THREE bills that FAILED below

S.Res.8 (Harkin), amending the Standing Rules of the Senate to provide for cloture to be invoked with less than a three-fifths majority after additional debate (67-vote threshold); Not Adopted: 12-82

S.Res.10 (Udall (NM)), as amended by Udall (NM) amendment #1, to improve the debate and consideration of legislative matters and nominations in the Senate (67-vote threshold); Not Adopted: 44-51

S.Res.21 (Merkley), as amended by Merkley amendment #2: (substitute) (67-vote threshold); Not Agreed to: 46-49

http://democrats.senate.gov/calendar/2011-01.html


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bluerum Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 06:05 PM
Response to Original message
6. So now all the rethug flotsam that dems could have nixed secretly gets nixed publicly.
I guess what I find most annoying is that the rethugs used this secret mixing to block so many nominations over the last two years. Now that they have a majority in the lower house they will be able to pass up any and every piece of nonsense for a vote.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tx4obama Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 06:12 PM
Response to Reply #6
7. The 'secret holds' pertain only to the Senate.
Edited on Thu Jan-27-11 06:17 PM by Tx4obama
The Senate voted on 'senate rules' today.

p.s. As far as legislation goes in the senate, any bill the republicans want to bring to the floor still would have to be put on the agenda by Sen Reid. So if Reid doesn't bring it up it's dead anyway.

The secret holds that the republicans were putting on Obama's admin and judicial nominations were disgraceful.





Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bluerum Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-28-11 05:30 PM
Response to Reply #7
29. Yes. But jibberish that is passed to the upper house must now be debated and voted on.
And there will be some astounding knuckle dragging bs passed up.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tabatha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 06:12 PM
Response to Original message
8. That is very important.
Good news.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
emulatorloo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 06:34 PM
Response to Original message
9. EXCELLENT. rec n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tx4obama Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 07:10 PM
Response to Original message
10. Senator Claire McCaskill's tweets
http://twitter.com/clairecmc

Woooohooooo! We did it! The Rules of the United States Senate now prohibit secret holds. The vote was 92 -4. about 1 hour ago via Twitter for iPad

and

@EricMayle Sen Ensign,Sen Lee,Sen DeMint,& Sen Paul voted no. Not sure why.Secret holds are no friend of Americans who want accountability. 43 minutes ago via Twitter for iPad


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tx4obama Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 07:16 PM
Response to Original message
11. Senator Bernie Sanders Statement
Statement: Senate Reforms Filibuster Rules

January 27, 2011

WASHINGTON, Jan. 27 Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) issued the following statement after the Senate voted today for changes in filibuster rules that have been abused by Republicans to block legislation:

The old rules let senators use parliamentary tactics to block bills that had broad, bipartisan support. Legislation could be stopped without senators even coming to the Senate floor to debate the merits of a bill. The old rules let senators secretly hold up nominees for judgeships and other offices subject to Senate confirmation. Practices designed to protect the rights of minorities were hijacked by Republicans to delay for the sake of delay. To be blunt, the Senate too often was dysfunctional. That is why I voted in favor of several reforms that would have gone a long way toward cleaning up the mess while preserving meaningful opportunities for senators on both sides of the aisle to seriously debate an issue.

While some proposals I supported did not pass, I am pleased that the Senate agreed to at least some modest but meaningful revisions of its rules. We have ended secret holds, reduced the number of presidential nominations that require Senate confirmation, ended the ability of a single senator to force the reading of an amendment as a delaying tactic, and reduced the use of filibusters to block even taking up a bill for debate.


http://sanders.senate.gov/newsroom/news/index.cfm?id=4ddce0f1-9a69-442e-92fa-f938dffec9ae

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tx4obama Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 08:09 PM
Response to Original message
12. Here's a link to CNN's article with more info regarding the new rules
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tx4obama Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 08:16 PM
Response to Original message
13. Here's a link to a new AP article regarding what passed and what failed to pass
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
No Elephants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-28-11 01:01 AM
Response to Reply #13
24. Thanks for your many excellent additions to this thread.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tx4obama Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-28-11 04:22 PM
Response to Reply #24
27. You're welcome :) n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RUMMYisFROSTED Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 08:16 PM
Response to Original message
14. A good rule.
:blush:

I can't quite believe it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
stevedeshazer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 10:32 PM
Response to Original message
15. Senate ends practice of secret holds
Source: The Hill

The Senate kicked off a series of stacked votes that would alter the Senate rules for the 112th Congress with a 92-4 vote to end the practice of secret holds.

This legislation deals with a sweeping, almost unparalleled power, Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) said on the floor prior to the vote. If you want to exercise that extraordinary power, you ought to do it in the sunlight.

Secret holds allowed a senator to anonymously object to legislation or the approval of a nominee.

Although Senate leadership already agreed to stop the practice of secret holds in a gentlemans agreement Thursday morning, the passage of Res. 28, the Wyden/Grassley/McCaskill Secret Holds Resolution, will codify the change and will apply to future sessions of Congress.

Read more: http://thehill.com/blogs/floor-action/senate/140811-senate-ends-practice-of-secret-holds
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kaleva Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 10:32 PM
Response to Reply #15
16. At least there has been some progress in reforming Senate rules.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
stevedeshazer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 10:32 PM
Response to Reply #16
17. Yup, this puts a leash on Tom Coburn.
It's a positive step.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
stevedeshazer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 10:33 PM
Response to Original message
18. Senate ends practice of secret holds
This thread has been combined with another thread.

Click here to read this message in its new location.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
yurbud Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 10:47 PM
Response to Original message
19. so it hasn't been passed yet?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tx4obama Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 11:00 PM
Response to Reply #19
22. Banning 'secret holds' DID pass
S.Res.28 (Wyden), to establish as a standing order of the Senate that a Senator publicly disclose a notice of intent to objecting to any measure or matter (60-vote threshold); Adopted: 92-4
List of yeas and nays:
http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=112&session=1&vote=00002

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
yurbud Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-28-11 12:46 AM
Response to Reply #22
23. Good! why didn't they go further and reform the filibuster?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
No Elephants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-28-11 01:39 AM
Response to Original message
26. Great. Eliminating holds entirely would have been much better, but
Edited on Fri Jan-28-11 01:42 AM by No Elephants
making the holder(s)accountable at least is a good step.

"The votes were 84-12 against the proposal by Sen. Tom Harkin, D-Iowa to gradually reduce the threshold and 51-44 to reject a proposal by Sens. Tom Udall, D-N.M., Jeff Merkley, D-Ore., and Harkin to end filibusters on motions to advance a bill to the floor, require those initiating filibusters to stay on the floor and to shorten debate time on nominations. A third resolution by Merkley that focused on requiring those filibustering to keep talking on the floor went down, 49-46. All the proposals to change Senate rules would have required two-thirds majorities for approval."

"He said he and McConnell would both avoid use of the so-called "constitutional option" where the majority could change filibuster and other Senate rules with a simple 51-vote majority in the 100-member chamber."



Sigh.



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Canuckistanian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-28-11 05:24 PM
Response to Original message
28. Right after Tom Coburn released HIS hold
:D
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tx4obama Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-28-11 07:14 PM
Response to Original message
30. Sen. Tom Udall (D-N.M.) comments after filibuster reform vote
Senator Talks Failure Of Rules Reform Package, Predicts Future Success
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/01/28/tom-udall-rules-reform-death_n_815630.html



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Democat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-29-11 02:43 AM
Response to Original message
31. Democrats will wait until they are in the minority to get rid of the filibuster!
That's how stupid our party is.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri Dec 03rd 2021, 11:48 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC