Posted on 04/06/2017 7:53:11 AM PDT by Dave346
At 11:00 a.m, the Senate will VOTE on cloture for Exec. Cal. #33, Neil Gorsuch, of Colorado, to be Associate Justice of the Supreme Court.
Why give them 30 hours to squeal like pigs all over the MSM?
LOCK THE DOORS NOBODY LEAVES !
Again, cloture is a strange bird. Invoking cloture does not mean ‘stop all debate RIGHT NOW’.
Cloture is essentially ‘setting the stage to end debate’ along with some specific guidelines. Some of those guidelines are...
* No more than 30 hours of debate may occur after vote is held
* No senator may speak for more than one hour during this period
* No amendments (if its legislation) may be move forward
You’ll like this...
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/3541674/posts
FROM LINK:
If Republicans are often the Stupid Party, Democrats have become the Crazy Party. And Republicans won record victories around the country in the expectation that they would stop the Crazy Party’s madness.
Instead it’s 2017 and Republicans continue to allow the left to set the agenda.
It’s time to realize that it’s not about which parts of government Republicans control, but about whether they are ready and willing to use whatever parts of government they do control in a coordinated effort to fight the left and force through a conservative reform agenda that will break the left’s hold on America.
I agree with that, my point about "not a big deal" was that today's vote didn't change anything. There is no Senate practice of minority veto of SCOTUS nominees, never was. The DEMs tried to implement that (in typical hypocritical fashion, after receding from the dysfunctional system they established, that allowed minority veto), and lost.
As Cornyn pointed out, the practice of minority veto of nominees is not some "old senate tradition." It is a Senate dysfunction, started by the DEMs in 2001. Reid abandoning that in 2013 was a bigger deal than today's vote.
Now, that's me taking a longer term view of Senate practice. I have no problem if the GOP spins this up to be the biggest, most monumental thing the GOP has ever done. And I don't mean to imply that success here is no big deal, because the alternative was failure, and that failure would have been a disaster for Trump, for the GOP, and in the long run, for the country.
Gorsuch will be confirmed tomorrow, but not because Rule XXII allocates half the debate time to one party, and the other half to the other party. The rule says "debate limited to 30 hours," and a few other limitations so one Senator can't hog all 30 hours.
Slap me silly, McCain came through.
Speaking of beginnings, I think some liberals have not only gone over the edge but have fallen into and down from the idiot tree. I was on another site where they allow political natter and when the nuke was announced, those on the left went totally dark/silent except for one super socialist/communist who posted “Better get used to saying “Justice Bill Ayers”. Frankly this response totally escapes me.
The Senate, being the ‘deliberate body,’ loves to hear themselves deliberate.
I agree with you.
The filibuster has produced the opposite of what it claims is its purpose. The stated purpose is to allow debate, thought, and the crafting of legislation much better for having gone through that process.
In reality, it is the exact opposite. It is a way to shut off discussion, statesmanship, compromise, and cooperation.
It’s simply a weapon to obstruct. There might have been a day when that was not so, but I don’t recall a time when it was other than a weapon of obstruction.
It must be placed in the back file someplace for a different day, if it is ever resurrected. There are things that must be done, and it appears that the simple majority rule will more likely lead to the eventual negotiation between our warring branches of the congress.
kabar is right. Today is a BIG day. A truly historic vote.
Well it looks like 30 hours of debate. So Gorsuch gets confirmed tomorrow instead of today.
The Dems would have kept the filibuster in place for SCOTUS if they only had a small majority or 50-50 in the Senate and a Rep in the WH. They would not change the rules, i.e., the Reid option.
Now, that's me taking a longer term view of Senate practice. I have no problem if the GOP spins this up to be the biggest, most monumental thing the GOP has ever done. And I don't mean to imply that success here is no big deal, because the alternative was failure, and that failure would have been a disaster for Trump, for the GOP, and in the long run, for the country.
It brings up the issue of abolishing the filibuster period for all legislation. The cloture rules were set up as a way to prevent a traditional filibuster along the lines of a Mr. Smith goes to Washington. There are fewer and fewer senators willing to stand in the well of the Senate for days conducting a real filibuster. It may be time to abolish the filibuster and let the majority rule as the consequence of the election results. It increases accountability and eliminates the Senate as the place where legislation goes to die.
I hope you didn’t bet on it ...
Good faith use of cloture is to allow a point a view to be heard - to persuade those who perhaps have not made up their mind, or who might be persuaded to change sides. The use of cloture for a body that has made up its mind it abuse of the rule, it creates a minority veto in practice, or a supermajority for passage if you prefer to view things that way.
The senate did fine for the 100 years from 1800 to 1900, more or less, without a cloture rule. Good faith disagreement and majority decision. Then some Senators began to abuse the "unlimited debate," so there came a need to have a way to limit debate. Cloture exists in Robert's Rules of Order - it's not some "senate invention." The point of cloture is to allow dissenting voices the opportunity to be heard, and to allow the body to say "we've heard enough, time to vote."
Individual senators like cloture because it gives them an inordinate amount of power. The Senate is massively dysfunctional, as a deliberative body.
In reality this change of the cloture vote threshold is just a formality. Senators by tradition don’t filibuster SCOTUS nominees. However, this allows the rats to tell their crazy constituents that they went as far as they could go to obstruct Gorsuch. Ultimately, it’s just the usual political theater.
Now I look forward to a couple of more constitutionalists to replace liberal despots on the bench.
I agree. Hopefully the lesson of the last 15 years of cloture abuse won't be lost on the GOP.
Unlimited debate subject to supermajority cloture made sense when the Senators were ambassadors to Washington appointed by State governments.
It would destabilize the Union to allow 25 States to legislate in a manner repugnant to 23 States.
And, tell the truth - if a Senator is simply a super-congressman, and the Senate functions under the same rules as the House, why not abolish it?
We actually NEED a Council of States to wield control over things that the permanent government at Washington comes up with. But today’s Senate isn’t it.
Cloture limits debate to 30 hours. No cloture = unlimited debate.
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.