Posted on 06/06/2005 9:43:20 AM PDT by ken5050
How does he keep getting away with it?
He shouts to the highest mountains that he's gonna deliver the memo, then call for Dubya to be impeached. When his big day comes to deliver...he's gone.
That that creature was nearly elected, still gives me the night sweats.
Is there a thread?
Hmmmmmmm - Maybe we can send a shark over - A nice South African Great White!
Forgot to ping you!
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1415958/posts?page=493#493
Prediction: If Jackson ever does show up for the verdict reading, he'll either be wheeled in on a gurney or be in a fashionably tailored straight jacket.
Breaking News: Jackson on the way BACK to the hospital
Honest??
I'm surprised they're working on a Monday! whew.
Thanks for the thread Ken. Kindly add me to your ping list. Regards. Kate.
Thanks for the ping. I have a meeting, but will check in later.
But, doesn't he already live with one of those named, Therezzzzza?
LOL. One minor problem though ... I'm going to be away from my usual desk for most of the week, so any replies, answers, corrections will NOT be timely.
Those who want a summary relating to the use of cloture might check my profile page. I'm looking forward to a lesson in the use of Motion to Reconsider (which is where the Bolton nomination lies).
The below flowchart is dated, and is not phrased to consider the ramifications of Bolton's omination being stalled due to an abuse of cloture. I think it'll be helpful to some, just the same.
The chart supposes the point of order would come after the failure to pass cloture. However, the point of order could be raised before the cloture vote is taken. The handling of the point of order would be the same if it precedes the cloture vote instead of coming after it.
The language in the point of order is highly relevant. It determines what is "won" if the point of order passes. It also determines the degree of objection by individual Senators. For example, some Senators will agree to a point of order that calls only for getting to the vote for Owen, but will disagree to a point of order that says a 51 vote cloture hurdle is appropriate for all nominations.
Mr. McCONNELL. I say to my friend from Iowa, if the majority leader does have to exercise the constitutional option and ask us to support it, it will be narrowly crafted to effect only circuit court appointments and the Supreme Court, which are, after all, the only areas where there has been a problem.McConnell goes on, responding to another question, contrasts and puts in context that the January 5, 1995 Harkin amendment to eliminate filibuster was voted down 76 - 19, because it was understood that the context was only legislation. The Harkin amendment is recorded at Pages S430 to S439 of the 104th Congress.
(109th Congress - Page S5750)
Pending: Harkin amendment No. 1, to amend the Standing Rules of the Senate to permit cloture to be invoked by a decreasing majority vote of Senators down to a majority of all Senators duly chosen and sworn. (Page S430).Directions to the Congressional Record of the 1995 debate:
A motion to table the Harkin amendment passed, yeas 76, nays 19. A simple majority could have terminated the amendment. (Page S438).
Votes that can lead to failure of the Constitutional Option.
Motion to proceed to
consider a nomination
is debatable
Cloture Motion is "Vitiated"
(withdrawn, as if it never happened) ------->+
only possible with unanimous consent |
|
|
Quorum Call |
| |
| |
Vote on |
Motion to reconsider ---> fails ... |
| same effect as |
| rejected cloture |
passes |
| |
| v
Vote on ---> passes --(MTPI)---> vote on the nomination
Cloture
(could be AFTER point of order - see below)
|
|
rejected
|
|
GOP raises a
point of order ---> chair alone implements point of order ---->+
to the Chair (the ultimate nuclear option) v
| |
| |
Chair passes |
point of order ---> to be decided without debate -->+ |
to the Senate | | |
| | | |
| v | |
| DEM Appeal DEM acquiesce |
| for Debate on to vote on |
| point of order point of order |
| | without debate |
| | | |
v v | |
point of order GOP Motion | |
to be debated <-- fails -- to Table | |
by the Senate the DEM Appeal | |
| (not debatable) | |
| | | |
| | | |
| v | |
| passes | |
| | | |
v | | |
point of order v v |
to be voted on <----------------+<----------------<-+ |
by Senate |
| |
| |
+-----> passes --> gain what the point of order asked for <--+
|
+-----> fails ---> lose what the point of order asked for
|
Alternate site for Vote on Cloture
(point of order was raised BEFORE Vote on Cloture)
|
|
+-----> passes --(MTPI)---> vote on the nomination
|
+-----> fails ---> no vote on the nomination
The primary object of cloture is parliamentary in nature, to limit debate, to refuse the right to the floor to some members of the body, and thereby speed getting to the vote. It is not the function of cloture to change the body from a majority rule to a minority rule system. DEM Senators, who have had every opportunity to have their voices heard in debate, are creating a parliamentary breakdown by refusing to vote.
No Constitutional issue is raised by deciding that point of order on a simple majority basis, as the Constitution does not raise a super-majority hurdle for advice and consent on nominations.
Likewise, a "rules issue" is (arguably) not raised, if the point of order does not reference the rule or request a change to the rule.
Frist did not acquiece to Rule XXII (but did not not seek UC to preserve the issue, as has been done in the past), on the first day of the Session, January 4, 2005.
I am I understanding this correctly, Senator Kerry will not be joining us this afternoon?
I felt safer too; but I sure didn't laugh as much.
Yup that is correct. His office says he is not in Washington D.C. and will bring up the memo when he gets back. Heh heh! Must be windsurfing!
"No mans life, liberty, or property is safe when the Legislature is in session."
Mark Twain
Perhps he won't ever return...........?
Honest!
See #51..I told you he was awesome..
We could only wish. But I'm looking forward to seeing the Republican pounce on him (at least they say they are going to). I'll believe it when I see it though!
The Bolton nomination was the subject of a cloture motion, and the vote on that cloture motion is NOT FINAL. The cloture vote is under a motion to reconsider.
Mr. REID. Madam President, while we have Senators in the Chamber, I wish to express, through the Chair, the appreciation of especially Senator Biden and Senator Dodd for the ends to which the majority leader went to try to resolve this issue. He spent an inordinate amount of time trying to get the information requested and was unable to do so. He did get information but not all that was necessary. I am disappointed that tonight we were unable to have a vote on Mr. Bolton, but it is not the fault of the Democratic caucus. We are not here to filibuster Mr. Bolton's nomination. We are here to get information regarding Mr. Bolton, information to which we are entitled. The people who voted against cloture--there were many--many of them will vote against Mr. Bolton if, in fact, he gets before the Senate. But most of the people here tonight are concerned about this being an issue dealing with the administration not giving us the information we want. That is all. It hurts their nominees. The administration has to be more forthcoming.
I hope that during the next 8 or 9 days the administration will take a fresh look at this and give the information to Senator Dodd and Senator Biden--most of what they want. They are the only ones who will see it. It will not be given to the entire Senate. They are not asking for information that may affect our country's national interest.
I hope we can go forward with the people's business. The distinguished majority leader told me yesterday that he was going to file cloture on these two judges. This is fine. We will work out a timely manner to complete the work on these judges and other judges. The Energy bill was reported out of committee today. The asbestos bill was reported out of committee today. There is a lot we have to do here, and we do not want this to be a divergence--the work we have to do is a divergence, but it is not the fault of the Democratic Senators that it is a diversion.
Mr. BIDEN. Madam President, will the Senator yield for a question?
Mr. REID. I will be happy to yield to the ranking member of the Foreign Relations Committee.
Mr. BIDEN. Madam President, I wish to make it clear to all my colleagues, speaking for myself, that I have absolutely no intention to prevent an up-or-down vote on Mr. Bolton. The issue here is about whether the executive branch will provide information which the majority leader tried yesterday and today to get, and which I think almost every Senator here would acknowledge the institution is entitled to get. We are prepared to not even ask that the ranking member and the chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee see the information we have sought. I implore the administration to provide the information, and--speaking for myself, and I can speak for no one else, but I believe my colleagues on my side would agree with me--we are willing to vote 10 minutes after we come back into session if, in fact, they provide the information--information to which Mr. Bolton's staff had access but which they will not give to the majority leader of the Senate. There is no reason offered.
I want to make it clear, we are ready to vote the day we get back, the moment we get back. We are ready to vote immediately if they would come forward, meeting us halfway on providing the information. That is all.
I thank the Chair.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The majority leader.
Mr. FRIST. Madam President, needless to say, I am very disappointed with where we sit today. We have had an interesting week, a very challenging week, starting the week on one clear direction and then sidetracked a little bit to what I thought was not an unreasonable feeling in this body that we were going to be working together and that we were going to address the important issues to America.
John Bolton, the very first issue to which we turned, we got what to me looks like a filibuster. It certainly sounds like a filibuster, looking at the vote today, it quacks like a filibuster, and I am afraid, shortly after we thought we had things working together in this body again, we have another filibuster, this time on another nomination--not a judicial nomination but another nomination--the nomination of John Bolton.
It does disappoint me. We had an opportunity to finish and complete this week with a very good spirit. We are going to come back to this issue. As has been said by Senator Biden, as I have said, we are going to revisit it, but I think what America has just seen is an engagement of another period of obstruction by the other side of the aisle, and it looks like we have, once again, another filibuster.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Democratic leader.
Mr. REID. Madam President, everyone here should understand that it is now the 26th day of May. This is the first filibuster that has been conducted in this Congress, if, in fact, we want to call this a filibuster--No. 1, first one. We have not been doing filibusters. We worked through some very difficult issues we talked about here before--bankruptcy, class action, and a number of other issues.
So it is not as if we are looking for things to have extended debate on. We need to work together, and I think this week has established that. We are going to work together. But how can we work together when information is not supplied?
So I hope we will all slow down the rhetoric during the break. This is something that happened. This is part of the Senate. I repeat, keep in mind, this is the first filibuster of the year and maybe the last. I hope so.
109th Congress - Page S5997 - May 26, 2005
109th Congress - Page S5998 - May 26, 2005
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.