Every member of Congress should study what
@chiproytx
and his allies accomplished this week. They offered a master class on how to win when you are outnumbered using the rules as leverage.
It appears to me that the Senate “owns” the shutdown seeing as how it couldn’t be bothered to stay in session to debate and amend legislation to not shut down.
McConnell decides what we take to the floor only so long as members defer to him to do so. Under the Senate’s rules, any member can make a motion to proceed to a bill. And any bill can be offered as an amendment to legislation on the floor.
McConnell on the special counsel protection bill: "I'm the one who decides what we take to the floor. That's my responsibility as the Majority Leader and we will not be having this on the floor of the Senate."
Before we all lose our minds, it’s important to take a moment and remember RBG as the incredible woman she was. A human being passed away. She deserves our respect regardless of whether we agree with her policy views.
Agreed. 100%.
@chiproytx
is a true legislative talent. One of the best I've ever seen. He has an uncanny ability to map the legislative terrain - inside and outside of Congress. He believes deeply in principle. But still respects his opponents. A true institutionalist.
If you think Chip Roy is a grandstanding grifter, you don't know the guy. He actually believes in the cause and is willing to fight to advance conservatism.
“Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell on Wednesday conceded that Democrat's seizure of the House slams the door on Obamacare repeal efforts in Congress” .......
When the Senate convenes next week,
@ChrisCoons
and I will ask for unanimous consent to bring S.2644, the Special Counsel Independence and Integrity Act, to a vote on the Senate floor. After the firing of The AG, it is more important than ever to protect the Special Counsel.
This suggests that the Senate parliamentarian gets to decide what is included in legislation that the Senate debates. She has no such power. Senators must remove the provision themselves on the floor. And senators don’t work for the parliamentarian.
This is wrong. The rules allowed the Senate to not act on Garland (they also allowed any senator to force a vote in relation to that decision). The rules do not allow Senate to ignore impeachment. That would require new rules. New rules require a vote.
@EWErickson
I remember when Republicans similarly called on Trump to step aside in favor of Pence weeks before the election. The irony is that Pence would likely not have won in 2016, making this all moot in 2019.
There is no “sixty vote requirement” to pass legislation in the Senate. Senators don’t have to use Rule XXII. Robert Byrd understood that. Why doesn’t Schumer?
The establishment is pro-status quo and resists efforts to change it. Candidates that it opposes may or may not be “extreme” - but the establishment always refers to such candidates as extreme to delegitimizing them and thus protect the status quo.
Legislative Procedure 101: Only the House and Senate can make changes to legislation. The Senate’s parliamentarian can’t take provisions out of a House-passed bill. Its majority leader can’t remove a provision. The president can’t do it. The VP can’t do it. Only the full Senate.
Outrage over Trump congratulating Putin while Congress debates 2,232-page omnibus bill released last night is reflective of the politics of scandal. Members prefer to focus on issues beyond their control instead of engaging in the hard work of legislating.
Leaders have long pretended otherwise. This isn’t unique to McConnell. They all wish they had formal power under the rules. But the fact is that they don’t.
But Tester voted for the American Taxpayer Relief Act (extended Bush tax cuts) at 1:39 am on New Year’s Day in 2013, less than an hour or two after the text was finalized. They didn’t even have printed copies if I remember correctly.
I was just handed a 479-page tax bill a few hours before the vote. One page literally has hand scribbled policy changes on it that can’t be read. This is Washington, D.C. at its worst. Montanans deserve so much better.
@StevenTDennis
If McConnell refuses to schedule the vote, another senator would have to move to proceed to it. My guess is that McConnell moves to proceed himself once he sees 51 senators support. Leaders don’t like senators knowing they can move to proceed themselves whenever they want to.
Never Trump Republicans criticize pro-Trump Republicans for blindly supporting the president. But many proclaim that they will support anyone in an effort to defeat him. Is that blindly opposing the president? They appear to be two sides of the same coin.
Ask yourself, how would McConnell stop this bill from coming up exactly? What rule does he cite? What power? By definition, something that is available to everyone is not the property of one person only. But McConnell seems to think so.
Since leaders get their power from others’ deference, they should be careful to avoid the appearance of using that power to the detriment of those on whose continued deference it depends. Why would the minority (or any senator) defer to majority leader to schedule Bills...
How would McConnell stop a member from making a motion to proceed on the Senate floor? In the spring of 2010, he made a motion to proceed to a bill even though he was minority leader at the time. Did Reid not enjoy the same exclusive power to determine Senate business at time?
Why are senators asking the president’s counsel what the Chief Justice can do and whether or not senators can go to court? They make the rules, not the Chief Justice or the courts.
Senators today complain about not doing anything. But they defer voluntarily to McConnell to make motions to proceed to legislation. If McConnell doesn’t move to proceed to bills senators want to debate, they should make their own motions to begin debate. Baby steps.
Reid was the most skilled Senate leader I ever researched or observed in action personally. I didn’t agree with his politics or with what he did as leader. But he changed how he led the Senate in response to events - and that doesn’t happen.
The coverage on
@CNN
@andersoncooper
of the motion to vacate is wildly inaccurate to the extent that it implies that five lawmakers can remove a speaker on their own.
One final thought. The most powerful person in the Senate isn’t the majority leader. It’s the Vice President. He can make rulings, chose to recognize senators, etc. but even there, he can be overruled by the Senate. As with the leader, the real power lies in the rank-and-file.
This analysis is misleading. There are rules and practices that stipulate what happens when House sends articles of impeachment to Senate. The Senate must vote to create new rules and practices that allow it to ignore impeachment. Not McConnell’s decision.
@realchrisrufo
@seanmdav
@SenBillCassidy
Looks like Critical Race Theory is, in fact, in the bill. First image is literally their foundational belief. Race consciousness is necessary? Really?!
How cynical is this move by McConnell? He supports raising the debt limit. He says the debt limit must be raised. But he says he won’t cooperate to raise it. That doesn’t make sense. At all. It makes zero sense.
This is a bizarre shutdown. Just checked in after a few days and saw that nothing has changed. Senate will be out until next week? Odd way for Republicans to fight for what they ostensibly want. Appears that they are waiting for cover from a Democratic majority in the House.
Will conservatives support confirming a Supreme Court justice during a Lame Duck session (after the election but before the next Congress convenes in January)? If they do, that will be a dramatic turn about for conservatives who once opposed Lame Ducks religiously.
The bill may be a good idea or a bad idea. And it may or may not need to be debated on the floor. But that’s not McConnell’s decision. If it were, then the Senate should spend more time evaluating the people it selects to be its leaders.
The 2020 election is teaching millions of Americans the timeless lessons of politics: victories are always provisional; defeats are never total; outcomes are rarely straightforward; change, for better or worse, takes a lot longer than most think; and the whole thing is exhausting
Kennedy’s retirement highlights what’s wrong with American politics. The outcome of so many policy questions should not depend on one person (or position) in a democratic republic.
The reason is that Democrats, just like Republicans, no longer view the Senate as a place where significant action occurs. It’s literally a waste of time from their perspective. The real action is at the ballot box.
I don’t understand the McConnell praise. He has transformed the Senate into a Human Resources agency. And confirming the president’s judicial nominees isn’t exactly a superhuman feat in a post-filibuster Senate. It requires scheduling the vote and voting.
Regardless of where they stand on raising the minimum wage, Americans should know where their elected representatives stand on it. The Senate process is designed to obscure that information.
Isn’t it telling that Senate leaders would rather shut down the government (again) instead of simply letting Paul offer his amendment? Seems unnecessary. Entire episode reveals true source of Senate dysfunction.
This kind of language sounds more like Lyndon Johnson than Mansfield. And therein lies the problem. McConnell is trying to run Mansfield’s Senate like Johnson. That’s why things have gotten so bad. He can’t make it work.
It’s interesting that currently serving senators bemoan the fact that the lions of the Senate are gone. They too could be lions if they simply acted on behalf of their convictions regardless of the consequences. It’s not like Senate lions are extinct.
Anyone else perplexed how one justice on the Supreme Court can alter law for a generation or more in a separation-of-powers system? Asking for a friend...
McConnell’s statement also highlights the illusory nature of our politics at present. If we were so polarized, if Democrats were so implacably opposed to the president, determined to protect Mueller, one would reasonably expect them to force votes on things like this.
Senate Democrats expected to begin voting rights debate today. Once on the bill, they only need to protect the text from being changed. That’s 51-vote territory. Democrats can table GOP amendments with 51 votes and no debate. And they can force GOP to mount a talking filibuster
Congress sets the size of the Court. (It could eliminate Alito’s seat). Congress can restrict the Court’s jurisdiction. Congress can tell the Supreme Court where it meets and it can give it a building….,
Problem with Ryan's comments here is that this bill isn't the result of a broken process. It is the result of leaders and members not wanting to do it any differently. All the rules changes in the world won't change that.
Ryan on 2,232 pg omnibus spending bill: "No bill of this size is perfect. And we must reform our broken budget process to return to a regular appropriations process. But this legislation addresses important priorities and makes us stronger at home and abroad.”
Senate Republicans waited 38 days to pick their leaders after an election between 1948 and 2022. The average number of days between Election Day and leadership election drops to 18 days between 1980 and 2022. The average is only 11 days since McConnell has been leader.
If Senate is on the Coast Guard bill for example, how exactly would McConnell stop a senator from offering an amendment to it that contained the text of this bill? Presumably he would fill tree, just like every other time bill was on floor, but senators don’t have to follow tree.
Once senators decide that policy change can happen between elections, they will change things. It will happen almost overnight. This is what happened when Senate transitioned from the 50s to the 60s.
The infrastructure talks are an example of why gangs are bad. Closed doors. A chosen few. Intrigue. Betrayal. All of us on the outside left wondering what’s going to happen next and feeling powerless to influence it. No accountability when things don’t pan out.
Read a few political science books about Congress. Then spend a day watching Congress. You will quickly realize that most political scientists are not describing Congress in their writings.
Crazy idea: McConnell should acknowledge that how he’s managed the Senate hasn’t worked for anyone and pledge to change his approach from this point on.
From a practical perspective, this kind of language doesn’t make sense. It makes the bill’s failure McConnell’s fault, even though he has no more power to kill a bill than the new senator from Mississippi. And if it comes up anyway, it makes him look weak.
Technically, the Supreme Court isn’t supposed to represent the views of the public. That would make it a political branch. It should adjudicate specific cases arising under the Constitution. In our system, Congress represents the views of the public.
@KDbyProxy
There is a lot more to
@chiproytx
than you think. People may disagree with him on some policies. But he is thoughtful and principled. And he sees the House as the place where our elected representatives go to adjudicate issues on our behalf.
Whether one thinks Trump out to be impeached or that he ought not to be impeached, we should all be able to agree that constitutional tools don’t damage the Constitution when they are used.
I remember when the Pennsylvania’s Republican establishment thought Pat Toomey was too extreme and considered his candidacy a disaster - in 2004 and in 2010. A good reminder that the establishment is not always a reliable barometer in politics.
What is happening in the Senate isn’t dysfunction. It is a debate. This is how the process is supposed to work. They will resolve this. Their conflict informs the outcome
Lindsey Graham says the biggest "threats to conservatism" are election officials making it easier for people to vote and social media companies cracking down on disinformation.
The Senate must vote to remove the minimum wage provision from the House-passed bill on a point of order raised by a senator or by approving a substitute amendment that does not include the provision.