Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

The Senate May Have Just Made A Major Breakthrough To Avoid Going 'Nuclear'
Business Insider ^ | 07/16/2013 | Brett LoGiurato

Posted on 07/16/2013 8:19:25 AM PDT by SeekAndFind

The Senate appeared closer than ever to undertaking the so-called "nuclear option" on Tuesday — but early this morning, Senators were on the verge of a breakthrough deal to avoid the significant rules changes. After an unusual 3.5-hour, closed-door meeting on Monday night, the Senate did not have a deal to avert the "nuclear option" that would lead changes in voting on President Barack Obama's executive nominees.

What will change if the "nuclear option" is invoked later this morning?

Practically, not much. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid is carrying out the fight strictly on behalf of seven of Obama's executive nominees whose confirmations he says have been unfairly delayed by the Senate GOP.

The change would reduce the threshold for confirming agency and Cabinet nominees to 51 votes, rather than the 60-vote threshold now in place. It would have no bearing on rules for passing actual legislation — or even in confirming judicial appointments.

Early Tuesday morning, Reid signaled that there might have been an early-morning breakthrough that would avert the measures. He heaped praise on Republican Sen. John McCain, who he said was able to "break through" when no other Republicans were willing.

(Excerpt) Read more at businessinsider.com ...


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Culture/Society; Front Page News; Government
KEYWORDS: filibuster; nuclearoption; senate

1 posted on 07/16/2013 8:19:25 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Translation! We get screwed!

http://freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3043619/posts


2 posted on 07/16/2013 8:20:37 AM PDT by ConservativeMan55
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

So it would leave the 60 vote threshold for Supreme Court appointments stand?


3 posted on 07/16/2013 8:22:01 AM PDT by AU72
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Just how did I know McCain would be the traitor selling us down the river again. Wake up Arizona.


4 posted on 07/16/2013 8:22:21 AM PDT by Licensed-To-Carry (Hey Obama! It's all your fault now, you own it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Let me guess. The Republicans have decided to win the war by “honorable” surrender. Wave them through with no protest.


5 posted on 07/16/2013 8:22:21 AM PDT by Jim Robinson (Resistance to tyrants is obedience to God!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: AU72

Senate begins cloture vote on Cordray nomination for CFPB. Expected to get 60 votes, reflecting backing off of nuclear option.— Chad Pergram (@ChadPergram) July 16, 2013


6 posted on 07/16/2013 8:24:12 AM PDT by Perdogg (Cruz-Paul 2016)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: AU72

Apparently so.

But this article is sloppy. There is not a 60 vote threshold to confirm appointees at present. The 60 vote margin is to end debate on the issues.

Clarence Thomas was confirmed to the Supreme Court by 52-48. Alito was confirmed 58-42. These nominees have always only needed a simple majority. The 60 vote threshold is to defeat a filibuster, which this article doesn’t really make clear.


7 posted on 07/16/2013 8:24:26 AM PDT by Dilbert San Diego
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Major breakthrough is one way of looking at it,I call it capitulation to evil.McCain again,as expected.


8 posted on 07/16/2013 8:25:20 AM PDT by Farmer Dean (stop worrying about what they want to do to you,start thinking about what you want to do to them)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Aren’t these the appointments the SCOTUS ruled illegal. Why is Reid trying to confirm people the court said aren’t eligible?


9 posted on 07/16/2013 8:25:29 AM PDT by Wiser now (Socialism does not eliminate poverty, it guarantees it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

What is the difference between rolling over and giving them what they want and letting them go “nuclear”? At least if they go nuclear you can say you went down fighting.


10 posted on 07/16/2013 8:25:29 AM PDT by Blood of Tyrants (Inside every liberal and WOD defender is a totalitarian screaming to get out.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

They’ve avoided pulling their heads out of the sand, much less going nuclear, for 6 years now.


11 posted on 07/16/2013 8:29:40 AM PDT by bgill (This reply was mined before it was posted.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: AU72

RE: So it would leave the 60 vote threshold for Supreme Court appointments stand?

Yes. Same as it always has been.


12 posted on 07/16/2013 8:32:18 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

We have been sold down the river one more time.


13 posted on 07/16/2013 8:32:35 AM PDT by sport
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Strength through weakness. Winning by losing.


14 posted on 07/16/2013 8:33:03 AM PDT by E. Pluribus Unum (Who knew that one day professional wrestling would be less fake than professional journalism?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dilbert San Diego
Right on the cloture, but it comes down to a nominee having 60 votes or not. Except for weasel RINOs who claim being against a candidate but vote to end debate thinking the final vote gives them cover.

We never hear about DINO's.

15 posted on 07/16/2013 8:33:44 AM PDT by AU72
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Dilbert San Diego

RE: Clarence Thomas was confirmed to the Supreme Court by 52-48. Alito was confirmed 58-42. These nominees have always only needed a simple majority.

I think the 60 vote threshold does not apply to judges and justices, only appointments to cabinet members.


16 posted on 07/16/2013 8:33:47 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

McCain is a fool. He always makes a “deal” to give the Democrats what they want and then is surprised when they break the deal. McCain always plays Charlie Brown while Lucy Reid snatches the ball away at the last minute. The old fool falls for it every time.


17 posted on 07/16/2013 8:37:29 AM PDT by Lurkina.n.Learnin (If global warming exists I hope it is strong enough to reverse the Big Government snowball)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Wiser now

They weren’t eligible for recess appointments. Nothing wrong with the proper vote before the Senate.


18 posted on 07/16/2013 8:37:29 AM PDT by JCBreckenridge ("we are pilgrims in an unholy land")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: AU72
So it would leave the 60 vote threshold for Supreme Court appointments stand?

Knowing McCain the compromise would leave the 60 vote threshold for all republican appointees but would lower the threshold to 51 for democrat appointees.

19 posted on 07/16/2013 8:41:59 AM PDT by HapaxLegamenon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind
Here, let me fix it:

The GOP May Have Just May Have Bent Over Far Enough To Avoid Going 'Nuclear'

Thanks. I feel better now.

20 posted on 07/16/2013 8:42:11 AM PDT by MamaTexan (I am a Person as defined by the Law of Nature, not a 'person' as defined by the laws of Man)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Face it. If the RATS don’t get their way, they will go ‘nuclear.’ And the Republicans will stand by with their proverbial thumbs up their you-know-whats looking like so many Alfred E. Neumans. The Republican Party has no guts, no onions, no saavy, and simply doesn’t know how to fight. I have given up on them.


21 posted on 07/16/2013 8:42:25 AM PDT by AdaGray (Primary Them All)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Anyone here believe the Dem’s WON’T go nuclear the next time it suits their agenda?

Me either.


22 posted on 07/16/2013 8:46:16 AM PDT by Buckeye McFrog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

McLame. One of the many reasons the GOP FAIL!


23 posted on 07/16/2013 8:49:04 AM PDT by ThomasMore (Islam is the Whore of Babylon!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Short version = GOP collapsed and caved.


24 posted on 07/16/2013 8:59:14 AM PDT by Georgia Girl 2 (The only purpose of a pistol is to fight your way back to the rifle you should never have dropped.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Wiser now

they were eligible just improperly placed.


25 posted on 07/16/2013 9:08:37 AM PDT by wiggen (The teacher card. When the racism card just won't work.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

“Everything you want now plus two more later”

More from BI:
“...would allow five of Obama’s nominations to go forward — nominees that include Richard Cordray to lead the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, Gina McCarthy as EPA administrator, and Thomas Perez as Labor Secretary.

Obama, who has not agreed to the deal, would then swap out two nominees to the National Labor Relations Board — Sharon Block and Richard Griffin. His two replacements would get votes quickly before a deadline in August that would render the board inoperable.”
...

There’s a scene in a movie or tV show where a buyer offers more than someone wants and says later he was ‘haggling’...


26 posted on 07/16/2013 9:28:01 AM PDT by mrsmith (Dumb sluts: Lifeblood of the Media, Backbone of the Democrat Party!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

McCain again. Traitor again!


27 posted on 07/16/2013 9:51:43 AM PDT by rawhide
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson

Peace with Honor II


28 posted on 07/16/2013 10:21:41 AM PDT by NonValueAdded (Unindicted Co-conspirators: The Mainstream Media)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: AU72
So it would leave the 60 vote threshold for Supreme Court appointments stand?

Until there's an actual Supreme Court vacancy. At that point Reid will threaten the nuclear option again, and McCain will appease him again by surrendering.

Make no mistake, this is a surrender.

29 posted on 07/16/2013 10:28:40 AM PDT by PapaBear3625 (You don't notice it's a police state until the police come for you.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind
He heaped praise on Republican Sen. John McCain, who he said was able to "break through" when no other Republicans were willing.

What a surprise...not!

Time to change parties, McLame.

30 posted on 07/16/2013 12:11:39 PM PDT by hattend (Firearms and ammunition...the only growing industries under the Obama regime.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

McCain again selling out.


31 posted on 07/16/2013 12:31:15 PM PDT by sickoflibs (To GOP : Any path to US citizenship IS putting them ahead in line. Stop lying about your position.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Lurkina.n.Learnin
The old fool falls for it every time.

McLame is not falling for anything. He is knowingly, actively, gleefully working with his Democrat pals to undermine the country and everything it once stood for.

32 posted on 07/16/2013 1:13:13 PM PDT by Count of Monte Fisto
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson