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

Skip to comments.

Another "loophole" for Schumer to try to ram through the "voting rights" bills
Hot Air.com ^ | January 13, 2022 | JAZZ SHAW

Posted on 01/13/2022 7:02:28 AM PST by Kaslin

There’s a sense of panic setting in among Congressional Democrats in the wake of resident Joe Biden’s inflammatory speech about passing the two currently pending bills allegedly aimed at securing “voting rights.” Over at The Hill, the pair of measures were described last night as being “on the brink of defeat.” But like a magician who remains confident that he still has a couple more rabbits stuffed in his hat, Majority Leader Chuck Schumer is cooking up a new plan to try to advance the Freedom to Vote Act and the John Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act. Unable to attract any GOP support for the measures and without the votes in his own party to torpedo the filibuster, Schumer is reportedly planning to attempt an end run to get around those barriers. The scheme, which has been used before with other proposals, involves having the House use what’s known as a “shell bill” to shoehorn the measures through, sending the new package to the Senate in the form of a “question,” where debate could begin to concur with the measure. (Axios)

Democratic leaders have found a mechanism to enable them to bypass an initial Republican filibuster and debate the party’s sweeping election reform bills, according to a new leadership memo obtained by Axios…

Driving the news: The House is expected to take up an amendment in the coming days related to NASA leasing “underutilized” property to private groups. Democratic leaders are referring to this as the “shell bill.”

The use of the term “shell bill” is appropriate because what the Democrats are attempting is more akin to a shell game practiced by street hustlers than any sort of routine legislative process. Similar to the way that Democrats have repeatedly attempted to abuse the reconciliation process to force the BBB bill through, this strategy abuses another rule that was intended to streamline the consideration of bills that have broad support but include additional amendments that require the approval of both chambers.

In this case, a bill dealing with the rather mundane issue of NASA leasing out some property it no longer uses to commercial spacefaring entities will be turned into something entirely different. The bill, which probably would have passed into law without much discussion, will have all of its original, relevant langue stripped out as an “amendment,” to be replaced with the full text of the Freedom to Vote Act and the John Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act.

The completely rewritten legislation, hiding under the guise of being an “amendment,” can then be sent to the Senate as “a message,” where the “amendment” can be advanced to the floor for debate with only a simple majority vote. So if the Democrats can get both Manchin and Sinema to go along with this scheme and bring in Kamala Harris to break the tie, the bill will reach the floor for debate.

This is the same tactic that was used last year for both the debt limit increase and the National Defense Authorization Act. I was a fan of the NDAA and recognized the need to pass it, but that was still a very dodgy way to push it through.

The problem with this plan is that it would only move the legislation to the point where it’s up for debate. At that point, the Senators can debate it to their hearts’ content, but it will still require sixty votes to end debate and move forward to a vote. Then they’ll be right back where they started. Unless they can torpedo the filibuster, there’s no way that they will get anywhere near 60.

In fact, there are serious questions as to whether or not they could even get fifty. These bills would do things like eliminating all voter ID laws in the country, laws that remain very popular with the voters in some states where vulnerable Democratic Senators will have to go home and explain this to their constituents. As Axios put it, there will be “insufficient support to change the 60-vote threshold needed to pass sweeping voting rights reforms.”

How many times do we need to see these tricks before everyone admits that the Democrats are just desperate and cheating? As I said, this is the same tactic they’ve been trying to use to warp the reconciliation process to pass Biden’s BBB act. And the Senate Parliamentarian has shot them down so many times that she’s becoming hoarse from yelling at them. That NASA bill was originally written with honest intentions and likely could have been signed into law. Now it’s being turned into a tool to pull off a con job. It’s all very disheartening.


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Editorial; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: chuckieschumer; filibuster; joemanchin; loophole; mitchmcconnell; votingrights
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-35 last
To: Kaslin

It is amazing that a political party that does not hold a majority in the Senate and is unable to get a single vote from the other party is adamant about forcing its agenda onto the nation.


21 posted on 01/13/2022 7:26:59 AM PST by Erik Latranyi (We are being played by forces most do not understand)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

Chuck’s Bill allows the Democrats to do all the voting for you so you have more free time to suffer up the Boot of the Democrat’s Dictatorship


22 posted on 01/13/2022 7:27:23 AM PST by butlerweave
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

John Lewis used to be on ATL black radio on Election Day excoriating blacks to get out and vote for the BLACK candidate. Civil rights my a$$, he was a race pimp, one step removed from Sharpton. Maybe one step. I have no respect for his memory.


23 posted on 01/13/2022 7:27:25 AM PST by bk1000 (Banned from Breitbart)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: All

Schumers plan requires invoking cloture.

The procedure for “invoking cloture”, or ending a filibuster, is as follows:

A minimum of 16 senators must sign a petition for cloture.
The petition may be presented by interrupting another Senator’s speech.

The clerk reads the petition.

The cloture petition is ignored for one full day during which the Senate is sitting (called a “Legislative Day”). For example, if the petition is filed on Monday, it is ignored until Wednesday; if the petition is filed on a Friday, it is ignored until Tuesday, assuming that the Senate did not sit on Saturday or Sunday.[38]

On the second Legislative Day after the presentation of the petition, after the Senate has been sitting for one hour, a “quorum call” is undertaken to ensure a majority of the Senators are present. However, the mandatory quorum call is often waived by unanimous consent.

The President of the Senate, President pro tempore, or presiding officer presents the petition for a vote.

The Senate votes on the petition; three-fifths of the whole number of Senators (sixty if there are no vacancies) is the required majority; however, when cloture is invoked on a question of changing the rules of the Senate, two-thirds of the Senators voting (not necessarily two-thirds of all Senators) is the requisite majority. This is commonly referred to as a “test vote”.

Cloture on a presidential nomination requires a simple majority of those present and voting. This was changed for all presidential appointments other than Supreme Court nominees in a 21 November 2013 Senate vote (the so-called “nuclear option”),[39] and was further extended to include Supreme Court nominees in an 6 April 2017 Senate vote.

After cloture has been invoked, the following restrictions apply:

No more than 30 additional hours of debate may occur on the bill in question[40] (though this additional time is commonly shortened or vitiated altogether; in addition, since the nuclear option of April 2019, nominations to subcabinet executive branch, or district court, positions normally mandate only 2 additional hours.

No Senator may speak for more than one hour.

No amendments may be moved unless they were filed on the day between the presentation of the petition and the actual cloture vote.

All amendments must be relevant to the debate.
Certain procedural motions are not permissible. Senate Rule XXII provides that no dilatory motion or amendment is in order under cloture.[41]

While there is no exact list of what motions are dilatory, “Motions to adjourn, postpone, recess, suspend the rules, and reconsider have been held to be dilatory.

There also is precedent supporting the authority of the presiding officer to rule that a quorum call is dilatory under these circumstances.”[42]

The presiding officer gains additional powers in controlling debate such as the power to count to determine whether a quorum is present and to rule amendments, motions, and other actions out of order on the grounds that they are dilatory.

No other matters may be considered until the question upon which cloture was invoked is resolved.


24 posted on 01/13/2022 7:27:40 AM PST by Liz (Our side has 8 trillion bullets; the other side doesn't know which bathroom to use. )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: All

Schumers plan requires invoking cloture.

The procedure for “invoking cloture”, or ending a filibuster, is as follows:

A minimum of 16 senators must sign a petition for cloture.
The petition may be presented by interrupting another Senator’s speech.

The clerk reads the petition.

The cloture petition is ignored for one full day during which the Senate is sitting (called a “Legislative Day”). For example, if the petition is filed on Monday, it is ignored until Wednesday; if the petition is filed on a Friday, it is ignored until Tuesday, assuming that the Senate did not sit on Saturday or Sunday.[38]

On the second Legislative Day after the presentation of the petition, after the Senate has been sitting for one hour, a “quorum call” is undertaken to ensure a majority of the Senators are present. However, the mandatory quorum call is often waived by unanimous consent.

The President of the Senate, President pro tempore, or presiding officer presents the petition for a vote.

The Senate votes on the petition; three-fifths of the whole number of Senators (sixty if there are no vacancies) is the required majority; however, when cloture is invoked on a question of changing the rules of the Senate, two-thirds of the Senators voting (not necessarily two-thirds of all Senators) is the requisite majority. This is commonly referred to as a “test vote”.

Cloture on a presidential nomination requires a simple majority of those present and voting. This was changed for all presidential appointments other than Supreme Court nominees in a 21 November 2013 Senate vote (the so-called “nuclear option”),[39] and was further extended to include Supreme Court nominees in an 6 April 2017 Senate vote.

After cloture has been invoked, the following restrictions apply:

No more than 30 additional hours of debate may occur on the bill in question[40] (though this additional time is commonly shortened or vitiated altogether; in addition, since the nuclear option of April 2019, nominations to subcabinet executive branch, or district court, positions normally mandate only 2 additional hours.

No Senator may speak for more than one hour.

No amendments may be moved unless they were filed on the day between the presentation of the petition and the actual cloture vote.

All amendments must be relevant to the debate.
Certain procedural motions are not permissible. Senate Rule XXII provides that no dilatory motion or amendment is in order under cloture.[41]

While there is no exact list of what motions are dilatory, “Motions to adjourn, postpone, recess, suspend the rules, and reconsider have been held to be dilatory.

There also is precedent supporting the authority of the presiding officer to rule that a quorum call is dilatory under these circumstances.”[42]

The presiding officer gains additional powers in controlling debate such as the power to count to determine whether a quorum is present and to rule amendments, motions, and other actions out of order on the grounds that they are dilatory.

No other matters may be considered until the question upon which cloture was invoked is resolved.


25 posted on 01/13/2022 7:27:41 AM PST by Liz (Our side has 8 trillion bullets; the other side doesn't know which bathroom to use. )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

If they want to name bills after dead democrats, why not call it the Robert K. Byrd act? He better represents the historical democrat position on voting rights.


26 posted on 01/13/2022 7:32:16 AM PST by bigbob
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Lazamataz

“ And I hate you for that.”

I only hat you back if your unvaccinated.

jk


27 posted on 01/13/2022 7:33:13 AM PST by FlipWilson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: brownsfan

“ I don’t see a downside for the Dems if they try this.”

They have homes. I would not want to be known as a Democrat of any stripe at that point, from dog catcher to mayor.


28 posted on 01/13/2022 7:33:30 AM PST by bk1000 (Banned from Breitbart)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

A lot of ‘motion’ without gaining any yardage.


29 posted on 01/13/2022 7:42:10 AM PST by Tallguy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: FlipWilson
I only hat you back

Back hat.

30 posted on 01/13/2022 7:56:16 AM PST by Lazamataz (I feel like it is 1937 Germany, and my last name is Feinberg.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Fai Mao

“They cannot back off. They know they hang if they lose.”

You see the thing is ... nobody ever really hangs.

Put a gallows out front of the Congressional building and announce the times for the events. Include the name(s) of the guest(s) of honor. For the more interesting ‘guests’ a raffle could be held to see who gets to pull the lever.


31 posted on 01/13/2022 8:24:36 AM PST by ByteMercenary (Slo-Joe and KamalHo are not my leaders.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

They aren’t happy with the slow death of their party now they want to speed it up.
Nobody is complaining the sooner the better.


32 posted on 01/13/2022 8:57:28 AM PST by Vaduz ( )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ByteMercenary

“For the more interesting ‘guests’ a raffle could be held to see who gets to pull the lever.”

Ooooh! Ooooh! I have some money saved up! How much for one raffle ticket? Do I get a discount for buying in bulk?


33 posted on 01/13/2022 9:20:33 AM PST by quikstrike98
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: Lazamataz

“I only hat you back”

Hey, no hat crimes in this website. This ain’t Canada


34 posted on 01/13/2022 9:40:49 AM PST by FlipWilson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin
It should rightfully be called "The Voting Fraud Rights Bill".

35 posted on 01/14/2022 4:31:29 AM PST by BitWielder1 (I'd rather have Unequal Wealth than Equal Poverty.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-35 last

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