ACB Confirmation Hearing Megathread

[BigRed]

And now the worthless horse **** that calls itself "Booker".

 

[Alamo]

Admittedly, I havn't done my homework, but if it takes 67 votes, how did they get the nuclear option for SCOTUS picks? My understanding is the original nuclear option (as regards Fed judiciary picks) was the Dems in 2013 under Little Chucky, and did not include SCOTUS picks, and then the Repubs added SCOTUS nuclear option under TurtleMan.) One would think 'virtual Votes' would be at least as doable.

.

It is possible for the Mitch+50 senators to amend the rules ("nuclear option), but it is not completely straightforward, and I suspect Mitch considers it would be just another distraction to the process. Also working out the "virtual process" (considering that it would be used in the future as well) would take time also.

 

[OakRiver]

And now the worthless horse **** that calls itself "Booker".

Excuse me! You will address the honorable Senator correctly...as Spartacus

 

[jamil]

It is possible for the Mitch+50 senators to amend the rules ("nuclear option), but it is not completely straightforward, and I suspect Mitch considers it would be just another distraction to the process. Also working out the "virtual process" (considering that it would be used in the future as well) would take time also.

Mitch did amend the rules to extend the nuclear option to apply to SCOTUS, thus ending the debate on Gorsuch.

 

[Alamo]

Mitch did amend the rules to extend the nuclear option to apply to SCOTUS, thus ending the debate on Gorsuch.

But he didn't include "virtual voting."

The "nuclear option" as I understand it is an exception or override to an individual rule, it's not a "forever after the rules are whatever the majority leader says they are." At least not until the Dems get senate control again.

 

[jamil]

But he didn't include "virtual voting."

The "nuclear option" as I understand it is an exception or override to an individual rule, it's not a "forever after the rules are whatever the majority leader says they are." At least not until the Dems get senate control again.

No, it changes the rule, even though the text of the rule stays the same. When Reed did it he effectively changed the rule that requires 3/5 majority to end the debate for cabinet and federal judicial nominees other than SCOTUS. So then, to end the debate on Gorsuch, Mitch used the same parliamentary trick. It exploits rule XX which allows the presiding officer to raise a question of order, "to be decided by the presiding officer without debate." The pro tempore can appeal to the Senate, which the senate can confirm or deny with a simple majority vote. So presuming that the presiding officer's party has control of the senate, the appeal will be denied and the point of order stands. The original text of the rule stays the same, but the meaning changes according to the point of order. If it's a senate rule which requires in-person votes, I would think it could be changed using the same trick.

 

[Alamo]

You say "no" but then you describe how it focuses on the individual rule, which was my point. It doesn't include virtual voting, Mitch would still has to go through the point-of-order process, and I don't believe he thinks that it worth it.



Which by the way, even if he goes the point of order route for virtual voting, he would still need the physical presence of the quarantined senators to vote on the appeal before it could become effective.

 

[mmpsteve]

Vote on Committee end of day today, I believe. I forget the floor vote date, but I think 10-28. I don't know why they have to wait that long. Wish they'd just get it done.

.

I mis-spoke on this. It looks like they'll vote it out of committee on 10-22, at which time TurtleMan takes it up on the floor.

.

 

[mmpsteve]

You say "no" but then you describe how it focuses on the individual rule, which was my point. It doesn't include virtual voting, Mitch would still has to go through the point-of-order process, and I don't believe he thinks that it worth it.

You may well be right whether he thinks it worth it, but depending on how the plague spreads, it may become necessary to get this job done. Only time will tell.

.

 

[Alamo]

You may well be right whether he thinks it worth it, but depending on how the plague spreads, it may become necessary to get this job done. Only time will tell.

.

I added this above while you were posting:
Which by the way, even if he goes the point of order route for virtual voting, he would still need the physical presence of the quarantined senators to vote on the appeal before it could become effective.

 

[chipbennett]

I only now realized that there was a separate thread for the confirmation hearing.

 

[mmpsteve]

I only now realized that there was a separate thread for the confirmation hearing.

You must be new here!

.

 

[jamil]

You say "no" but then you describe how it focuses on the individual rule, which was my point. It doesn't include virtual voting, Mitch would still has to go through the point-of-order process, and I don't believe he thinks that it worth it.



Which by the way, even if he goes the point of order route for virtual voting, he would still need the physical presence of the quarantined senators to vote on the appeal before it could become effective.

Okay. I misunderstood what you were saying in that second paragraph to say that the trick had to be done each time it's invoked.

 

[jamil]

You may well be right whether he thinks it worth it, but depending on how the plague spreads, it may become necessary to get this job done. Only time will tell.

.

It may not be worth it to Mitch now. But if Republicans retain control of the Senate, it'll come up again for other legislation. Maybe the Senate would have the votes in that case just to change the rule the right way. But I don't think Democrats are inclined to cooperate at all with Republicans right now. They'd probably oppose it for the sake of opposing it. Point is, if not now, to get anything at all done, Mitch might have to go nuclear to enable remote Senate votes.

 

[KellyinAvon]

I mis-spoke on this. It looks like they'll vote it out of committee on 10-22, at which time TurtleMan takes it up on the floor.

.

TurtleMan!!

 

[Hatin Since 87]

RIP Neal. He was the best friend a turtle man could ask for. And a hell of a banjo player.

 

[historian]

Advances Unanimously to the Senate Floor (12-0).