Posted on 05/23/2005 8:14:11 AM PDT by OXENinFLA
Senate Debate on Nominations Today the Senate resumes debate on the nomination of Texas Supreme Court Justice Priscilla Owen to the Fifth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals. The Senate will conduct its first roll call vote of the week at 5:30pm. Follow the C-SPAN networks & C-SPAN Radio for the debate on Senate rules & judicial nominations. MON., 11:30AM ET, C-SPAN2
--------------------
ORDERS FOR MONDAY, MAY 23, 2005 -- (Senate - May 20, 2005)
[Page: S5714] GPO's PDF
---
Mr. CORNYN. I ask unanimous consent that when the Senate completes its business today, it stand in adjournment until 11:30 a.m. on Monday, May 23. I further ask that following the prayer and pledge, the morning hour be deemed expired, the Journal of proceedings be approved to date, the time for the two leaders be reserved, and that the Senate then return to executive session and resume consideration of the nomination of Priscilla Owen to the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals, provided that the time from 12 noon until 1 p.m. be under the control of the majority leader or his designee and, at 1 p.m., the Democratic leader or his designee be recognized; provided that floor time then rotate between the two leaders or their designees every 60 minutes until 4 p.m., at which time the majority leader or his designee be recognized until 4:45 p.m., to be followed by the Democrat leader or his designee from 4:45 p.m. until 5:30 p.m.
The PRESIDENT pro tempore. Without objection, it is so ordered.
--------------
PROGRAM -- (Senate - May 20, 2005)
[Page: S5714] GPO's PDF
---
Mr. CORNYN. Mr. President, on Monday, the Senate will resume consideration of the nomination of Priscilla Owen to serve as a circuit judge on the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals. Monday will be the fourth consecutive day the Senate considers the Owen nomination.
Over the past 3 days, a number of Members, on both sides of the aisle, have come to the floor to speak on the nomination. We have conducted over 25 hours of debate, and we will continue on Monday. Moments ago, we filed a cloture motion on the nomination, and that will ripen on Tuesday of next week.
On behalf of the majority leader, I remind my colleagues the leader has announced our next rollcall vote will occur Monday afternoon at 5:30. That vote will be on a motion to instruct the Sergeant at Arms to request Senators' attendance. Senator Frist will have more to say about next week's session on Monday.
"Also, she is hot under the collar about some bases that are on the BRAC list"
Maine was hit very hard by the base closing list. I have a feeling that Frist could get her vote (and Snowe's vote, possibly) if he's willing to open that list and make some promises.
Did Byrd receive 67 votes when he changed the rules to 60?
Not unless its the dems trying to get their way. It's pretty clear to me that the dems did not believe that the Republican speakers this morning were going to move away from the arcane rules and tell everyone what's really going on here. He comments are not responsive to that. And by the way, Di, the comity went out of the Senate some time ago. Have you observed your fellow California Senator lately...ever?
It just got more important for this to work, IMHO
Your HO is dead on, now that tramp is saying that Santorum called the dimmy's Hitler! My head is about to explode! He did not say that!
The pigeon sisters will not vote to restore the Constitutional balance that requires the Senate to dispose of a nomination with a vote.
There may be perks and positions that can be withheld (e.g., committee positions), but it is almost certain that the GOP will put them on the ballot again, regardless of their votes.
Just got here on a break from work, what is happening?
Comity might have left, but comedy is king!
Excellent; thank you for calling!
WOW--I hope so, this could get fun!!! I may have to go stock up on Wheat Thins!!!
BTW, in my last post, I referred to the Atlanta murders when posting about the SCOTUS decision--before someone reminds me that the suspect in Atlanta was on trial for rape instead of murder, I know...
I remembered that after I posted---so, I am sorry. BUT, maybe that illustrates that the SCOTUS should have gone the OTHER way, instead of unshackling murders!
She should sit down a shut up!
< /sarcasm>
Diane doesn't think it legally possible for the Senate to change the Rules
I suppose she wants the Supreme Court to decide what the Senate can and can't do
FWIW ...
Senate Rules from 1789 to 1806 permitted calling the question with a simple majority. See http://rules.senate.gov/history.html, Rule IX. This rule was removed in 1806, and in its place was a requirement to obtain unanimous consent to move to the vote. One objecting Senator could stifle the vote.
The cloture rule was implemented in 1917, on a bipartisan 76-3 vote. (p226). With the concurrance of 2/3rds of the Senators voting, debate would be limited and taking the vote would be set for a time certain.
In 1949, on a 63-23 vote, the threshold was modified to 2/3rds of the Senators duly chosen and sworn. (p229).
In 1959, a 77-22 vote made cloture possible with 2/3rds of the Senators present and voting. (p247). Also, cloture was broaded to include rules changes - this is where the "2/3rds are required to change the rules" rule comes from. The 1959 changes are referred to as the "Johnson 9LBJ) Compromise."
In 1975, Senator Pearson introduced a proposal to change the threshold to 3/5ths of Senators present and voting. (p257). That proposal did not pass. In the same year, Senator Byrd's proposed revision to 3/5ths of all Senators passed on a 56-27 vote. (p259).
http://www.law.harvard.edu/students/orgs/jlpp/Gold_Gupta_JLPP_article.pdf
Isn't everyone tired of silly compromises? We Won!!The BRAC list is as it is for a reason. Our Defense Department has deemed these bases unneeded. Close them and save some money. No compromises!
There is absolutely no reason for a Republican to enter into any kind of deal. None. The only explanation I have for Graham doing so is to present himself as a moderate for a future presidential run. Well, he can forget it. I wouldn't support him even if he won the primary.
All they have are appeals to Pubbies to bolt the party and come over to the dark side and the threat that you guys might not be in the majority someday.
I just heard on our local news as well that the Senate expects an all-nighter and that cots were being wheeled into the 'Strom Thurmond room' in preparation.
One almost has to wonder if Bush can appoint judges in lieu of any *positive* confirmation from the Senate. After all, they merely get to advise & consent. If they refuse to address the issue via parlimentary tactics, then they are voluntarily abdicating their oversight priviledges ie it's an implicit confirmation. As you state, the Repubs *affirmatively* denied Clinton's appointments, which is a completely different matter.
Rush-media template- will there be a compromise? There is nothing to compromise!
I would again remind Republican "mavericks" and "mavericks-in-waiting" that McCain & the media will not save you from a 'compromise' backlash.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.