Republicans have already found a way to F*CK up the judicial nominees !!!!!!!!!!

[Tx4obama]

Today the Senate Judicial Committee had an Executive Business Meeting schedule to vote 10 nominees out of committee so that they would be sent to the full Senate.

Looks like perhaps the republicans on the committee did not show up so there was no quorum!

The Senate Judiciary Committee held an executive business meeting to consider pending nominations and legislation on November 21, 2013. A quorum was not present, and the Committee was not able to complete action on pending matters. The meeting recessed subject to the call of the Chair.

http://www.judiciary.senate.gov/

Current members of the Senate Judiciary Committee:

Democrats:

Patrick Leahy, Vermont, Chairman
Dianne Feinstein, California
Chuck Schumer, New York
Dick Durbin, Illinois
Sheldon Whitehouse, Rhode Island
Amy Klobuchar, Minnesota
Al Franken, Minnesota
Chris Coons, Delaware
Richard Blumenthal, Connecticut
Mazie Hirono, Hawaii

Republicans:

Chuck Grassley, Iowa, Ranking Member
Orrin Hatch, Utah
Jeff Sessions, Alabama
Lindsey Graham, South Carolina
John Cornyn, Texas
Mike Lee, Utah
Ted Cruz, Texas
Jeff Flake, Arizona

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U.S._Senate_Judiciary_Committee

[KamaAina]

1. Oh dear FSM, you're right!

http://www.judiciary.senate.gov/about/committee-rules.cfm

III. QUORUMS

1. Six Members of the Committee, actually present, shall constitute a quorum for the purpose of discussing business. Eight Members of the Committee, including at least two Members of the minority, shall constitute a quorum for the purpose of transacting business.

Is there some way to force them to attend?

[hootinholler]

20. It might be possible to compel attendance

The Sgt At Arms would be the person who would do it. I think it turns on the meaning of subject to the call of the chair.

[Warpy]

30. Right, it's time to play hardball with these tantruming bastards

Have them dragged into the meeting. Force them to do their damned jobs.

The committee would be better off without them, though. Those GOPs read like a who's who of fascists.

[Decaffeinated]

45. Hyperbole is fun...

... but what are you really going to do? Walk them in at gun point?

[VanillaRhapsody]

51. Yes...if necessary.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

68. No you're not, so just stop saying silly things.

[VanillaRhapsody]

73. Apparently I am not the only one that thinks so...

[Nuclear Unicorn]

75. That only amplifies the sound of silly.

[VanillaRhapsody]

79. silly coming from a Unicorn?

[Nuclear Unicorn]

80. Yes, because I'm a *real* unicorn.

[VanillaRhapsody]

81. Right that's not silly at all.

[Warpy]

52. Gun point? Shackles and leg irons will do.

[beerandjesus]

67. But the "Second Amendment remedy" would be more poetic...

...so I'm going with the guns.

[Warpy]

71. Tar and feathers would be more appropriate

but I just want them dragged in to sit and pout with their arms crossed. They just need to have their bodies present, the government will work around them.

I've always said Republicans would make good doorstops and paper weights.

[AAO]

69. I'd just as soon drag them to jail. Fucking lowlifes.

We are talking about the United States Senate, right? Somehow that used to sound much more impressive in the past.

[Warpy]

72. If we acted like they do at our jobs, we'd get the bum's rush

and find ourselves sitting on them on the sidewalk, literally, as company goons guarded the door.

I just hope enough people back home are paying attention.

[AAO]

74. And now they lowered the bar further

Admitted cocaine addicts are perfectly acceptible in the US Congress. You or I would be in jail right now (for sure if we had brown skin). I believe everyone should get the opportunity to have a second chance. So, quit your position, go get treatment, then you can run again (and see if they are stupid enough to elect you a second time).

[spanone]

2. they are shrewd assholes. they hate this President beyond reason.

[Skidmore]

5. Yes. And what pisses me off the most is that

there are some on the left who have aided and abetted the right by withholding votes for a working majority in the House and not lending their voices in support of the pPresident when the Koch coalition have been particularly egregious.

[polichick]

21. It's not just about this prez - it's about holding onto power.

[AAO]

70. Most of them are in dire need of psychoanalysis.

[warrior1]

3. Do it without them

[HappyMe]

4. I'm not surprised.

It's their way of stamping their feet and hollering No! like a 2yr. old.

[moondust]

6. "He who does not work, neither shall he eat"

Wasn't that somebody's Whine Of The Day not too long ago? Hmmm, who was that and what did they stand for?

[red dog 1]

40. "Those who don't work don't eat".....Michele Bachmann

In a Tweet on September 20, 2013

http://inagist.com/all/381127006181937152/

[HooptieWagon]

59. Simple solution, then.

What is it the pukes say? Run government like a business? Seems like the logical solution to the republicans refusing to show up for work is to stop their paychecks. I suppose a stop can be placed on their health insurance, also.

[red dog 1]

64. Sounds good to me!

[ancianita]

7. Welp, then they need to change the committee quorum rule to a simple majority. Refusal to do

one's job is an ethics violation, and the committee chair should use that pretext to boot them off if they don't attend.

[Scuba]

16. +1 Show up or your off the Committee.

[ancianita]

18. Yup. Not an unreasonable expectation for highly paid representatives of taxpayers.

[polichick]

23. Really. Where else would this be okay?

[KamaAina]

34. "Attendance at all meetings is encouraged."

From the very bottom of the rules page linked in Post #1.

Chairman Leahy needs to emulate Reid and put some teeth in that.

[HooptieWagon]

60. Stop their paychecks and health insurance....

...if they refuse to work.

[Orrex]

8. This is how McConnell negotiates fairly.

[Pretzel_Warrior]

9. I'm sure there is a senate rule way around this

Otherwise Reid wouldn't have risked bad blood of nuclear option. Call a general session and then send the committee off to do their business.

[Tx4obama]

10. Senate is 'in session'. I'm pretty sure there's no rule to force GOPers to attend commitee meetings

This sucks. Republicans SUCK.

I've waited all week to see those ten nominees get their committee vote!

[Pretzel_Warrior]

12. There is a way. Reid is a master of senate rules--even the really arcane ones.

[Bolo Boffin]

11. And you can bet any Supreme Court nominee will be fought like the Normandy invasion.

And of course it's one of "mah Senators," John Cornyn, who's acting the asshole.

[Tx4obama]

13. Article below regarding Texas vacancies...

Here: http://www.democraticunderground.com/107813561

[Bolo Boffin]

24. And those are usually just passed on by the executive branch, IIRC.

They're just being doodyheads.

[Tx4obama]

26. Huh? Not sure what you're saying...

[Bolo Boffin]

28. I thought the senators make the nominations

And the executive branch passes them along out of courtesy. As in, Cruz and Cornyn could nominate just about anyone (except maybe John Yoo) and that would be Obama's nominee. But they won't even do that.

[Tx4obama]

31. Right - Senators from the state send a LIST of folks to the executive branch for Obama to pick from

... but many of the GOPer Senators have been refusing to do that.

I read an article awhile ago and there are several red states that have refused to send Obama lists of potential nominees.

p.s. Only Obama makes the actual nomination.

[Bolo Boffin]

33. That's it! They give him a list.

Talk about cutting off your nose to spite your face!

Thanks!

[former9thward]

44. That is not it.

The only lists come from the party of the President -- not the opposition. They have no say other than to vote yes or no.

[Tx4obama]

47. That is not so.

Take Texas for example...

" ... Cornyn nor Cruz has recommended anyone in 2013, preventing Obama from making any appointments. ... "

http://www.democraticunderground.com/107813561

And there are a few more red states that are refusing to submit names too.

[former9thward]

50. Obama is not required to use any list.

Senator Ted Cruz uses a judicial nominating commission.
Senator John Cornyn uses a judicial nominating commission.

Since 1986, the state's U.S. senators have used a federal judicial evaluation committee to vet applicants for vacancies on the state's federal courts. The committee reviews applicants' resumes, conducts interviews, and forwards the names of highly qualified candidates to the senators, who then recommend a candidate to the president. Over the years, the size of the committee has ranged from 28 to 40 members who are appointed by the senators, with members responsible for vacancies in the federal district in which they reside. The committee currently consists of 35 members and includes several Democrats.

Members of the state's Democratic congressional delegation are also recommending candidates to fill vacant federal positions in the state.

http://www.judicialselection.com/federal_judicial_selection/federal_judicial_nominating_commissions.cfm?state=FD

[Bolo Boffin]

54. You are right to a point. We're talking about senatorial courtesy here.

And yes, the President generally limits his or her consultation to the senior member of a potential nominee's state for multi-state federal posts as long as they are a member of his or her party.

But here we are talking about appointments that affect only the state of Texas. And senatorial courtesy also means that within the Senate, they will not vote on someone for a state-wide federal post if the senators from that state object. It is not a hard-and-fast rule. It is a custom. The easiest way to avoid such a stalemate is for the senators from that state of either part to submit nominations to the President that they already deem unobjectionable. And so the President proceeds to nominate.

Cruz and Cornyn have refused to even do this as TX4Obama's article shows.

[Tx4obama]

55. Your bolded text says: 'also'

"... Members of the state's Democratic congressional delegation are also recommending candidates... "

But it is the U.S. Senators that pick and submit the final names to the executive branch.


Your text also says...

The committee reviews applicants' resumes, conducts interviews, and forwards the names of highly qualified candidates to the senators, who then recommend a candidate to the president.

It is the U.S. Senators that have the final say on which names go to the president.

[former9thward]

57. Obama does not have to follow what a Senator says.

For some reason you seem to think he does. Here is another state:

Alabama:

Senator Richard Shelby does not use a judicial nominating commission.
Senator Jeff Sessions does not use a judicial nominating commission.

With two Republican U.S. Senators, leading state Democrats established their own processes to screen candidates for federal appointments in late 2008. U.S Representative Artur Davis, the senior Democrat in the state's congressional delegation, selected a panel of two Alabama law school deans and five current or former judges to recommend candidates to become federal judges and prosecutors. The Alabama Democratic Party formed a similar commission

The two senators are cut out of the process.

[Tx4obama]

58. You keep missing the main point here. The commission can 'recommend' the names to the two SENATORS

It is the two U.S. Senators that SUBMIT names to the president.

Two republican U.S. Senators do NOT have to submit any of the names that the democrats recommend.

The Court of Appeals that cover more than one state - has Senators from several states recommending names to the president.

But in a red state with two republican U.S. Senators it is those two senators that pick and submit the names.

[former9thward]

61. I guess we have to disagree.

In Alabama the appointments have not been recommended by any Senator.

[Tx4obama]

62. Then who is it that you think submitted the names to the executive branch?

It is the U.S. Senators that submit the lists to the executive branch.

Have a great evening.

[former9thward]

63. From Democratic Congresspeople.

Such as:

Congresswoman Sewell has set up a Screening Committee for Federal District Judgeships in the State of Alabama to assist her with recommendations that will be made to the President to fill vacant federal judgeship positions in Alabama. The Screening Committee will include distinguished legal scholars, jurists and practitioners from the state of Alabama. The Screening Committee will review all applications, conduct interviews with applicants and make recommendations to Congresswoman Sewell. Nominations for federal judgeships are made solely by the President of the United States and all nominees must be confirmed by the United States Senate.

http://sewell.house.gov/press-release/congresswoman-terri-sewell-announces-judicial-nomination-process-federal-judgeships

[former9thward]

41. Absolutely untrue.

The President has the sole power to appoint. The President as a courtesy, but not a Constitutional obligation, will consult with the senior senator of HIS party in the jurisdiction. If there is no senator of HIS party then he doesn't consult.

[Tx4obama]

46. If it is a red state with two republican U.S. Senators it is those two senators that...

... submit a list TO the executive branch of potential nominees.

And 'after' the president nominates someone then the two U.S. Senators will present that person to the Senate Judiciary Committee at the hearing.

That is how it has been done for a very very long time.

[former9thward]

48. No it isn't.

I don't know where you are getting that from but it is wrong. Consulting is done with His party.

[Tx4obama]

53. You need to read up on 'nominating commissions' - which GOPers sway their way in the red states

Federal Judicial Selection
Federal Judicial Nominating Commissions

-snip-

These commissions have traditionally been known as "nominating commissions," but their role is different than that of the judicial nominating commissions that operate in two thirds of the states for state judgeships. While state commissions recommend (or nominate) a short list of candidates directly to the appointing authority, federal commissions submit candidates to U.S. senators, who may then forward their names to the president for possible nomination. While these entities are still referred to as nominating commissions by some senators, in many states they are called screening panels or advisory committees.

-snip-

http://www.judicialselection.us/federal_judicial_selection/federal_judicial_nominating_commissions.cfm?state=FD

[PoliticAverse]

19. The filibuster change today excludes Supreme Court nominees so those still need 60 votes. n/t

[Bolo Boffin]

22. That's what I mean. n/t

[mountain grammy]

14. Fucking bastards, drag them in by their balls.

[KamaAina]

27. With what?

[mountain grammy]

29. Ok, that looks like it'll work.

[Blue Idaho]

15. Fade up from Black...

An empty chair at a table in a room. A clock is ticking.

Voice over -

Senator _________ is paid $176,000 a year. He has his own retirement scheme and heath benefits. If he's served five years - he'll receive some kind of pension - if he serves longer it could be as much as $60,000 a year for the rest of his life. All paid for by your tax dollars.

Do you really think its too much to ask that he show up for a committee meeting?

Call your senator - tell him to do his job, all of his job.

Fade to black.

[Scuba]

17. +1

[red dog 1]

42. + 2

[nykym]

25. How about this?

http://www.senate.gov/artandhistory/history/minute/Compulsory_Attendance.htm
The first couple of lines paint a priceless picture.

[Tx4obama]

32. But that is in regards to the 'full senate' not a senate committee

[KamaAina]

35. Pretzel_Warrior has found a way to F*CK the repukes!!!!!!!

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024071372

[Tx4obama]

36. Yep. that 'might work', but GOP still could obstruct that process a bit...

-snip-
Although very few nominations proceed without the support of a committee, chamber rules make it possible for the full Senate to consider a nomination a committee does not report. Technically, Senate Rule XVII permits any Senator to submit a motion or resolution that a committee be discharged from the consideration of a subject referred to it. A motion to discharge a committee from the consideration of a nomination is, like all business concerning nominations, in order only in executive session. If there is an objection to the motion to discharge, it must lie over until the next executive session on another day. It is fairly common for committees to be discharged from noncontroversial nominations by unanimous consent, often with the support of the committee, as a means of simplifying the process. It is far less common for Senators to attempt to discharge a committee from a nomination by motion or resolution.
-snip-
http://www.senate.gov/CRSReports/crs-publish.cfm?pid=%270E%2C*P\%3F3%22P%20%20%0A

[Pretzel_Warrior]

38. It looks like Harry Reid schedules two executive sessions on consecutive days

The minority can have at least one senator object to discharge resolution...then it is delayed to following day. On following day, they vote on resolution and voilà! It is out of committee and can be referred to general senate for hearings, testimony, debate and vote as per usual process. But withou that pesky filibuster.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Executive_session

[Arugula Latte]

39. Has it ever been more clear that Republicans are the scum of the earth?

[LanternWaste]

43. Avoiding a quorum a fine thing to do if your a Republican... otherwise, it's "extortion."

Just so we're all clear-- avoiding a quorum a fine thing to do if your a Republican... otherwise, it's "extortion." I certainly can't expect the GOP to hold themselves to the same standard they hold others to...




TX GOP statements on the Democratic walkout to avoid a quorum in 2008:

"This is not democracy, it is extortion," said GOP Rep. Dianne White Delisi.

"Saddam ran an oil-for-food program. Texas Fugitive Dems are running a blackmail-for-quorum program," was number three.

The Democrats are guilty of "politics at its worst," said David Rushing, the group's chairman. "This walkout is an absolutely shameful display of partisanship that ought not be tolerated by the public.

U.S. House Majority Leader Tom DeLay, R-Texas, said Tuesday that he consulted an attorney in his office to determine for the Texas House speaker whether FBI agents and U.S. marshals could be used to arrest the Democrats.

GOP officials had earlier threatened to send police after the missing Democrats. The would-be quorum-busters planned to leave the state to avoid being located by the Department of Public Safety or Texas Rangers (search), who could detain them and forcibly return them to the House floor, a source said.

"If they bust the quorum he [Craddick] is going to put a call on the House. That means they lock the House down. Everybody's got to stay inside. They send the DPS out to look for these guys," said Craddick spokesman Bob Richter


Free Republic posters had these gems about the same story:
"The RATS, for the first time in decades, are the minority party in the Texas House, and they can't handle it, so they're throwing tantrums now that WE'RE doing to them what they used to do to us."

"They don't play by the rules. When the people of Texas finally expressed their will, the demos dig in their heels and defied it."

"Yall think it's time to let Holiday Inn and Denny's know they are harboring fugitves (sic)?"

"I think their punishment should be that they are not allowed to come back to Texas."

"The Speaker made a quorum call. That let's him have the Texas Rangers and DPS fo get them"

" I don't think there is any recourse in the Texas law except to round them up (arrest them) and take them to the Texas Legislature..."

[CanonRay]

49. Call the Sergeant at Arms and have the bastards delivered to the conference room.

[Tx4obama]

56. I think that rule applies only to the 'full senate' not a senate committee

[madrchsod]

65. so basically we still do not have a functioning government

remember the farm bill is coming up in january....if that`s not passed the shit is going to hit the fan.

[Tx4obama]

66. An article regarding the farm bill on link below

Here: http://www.politico.com/story/2013/11/farm-bill-update-100217.html?hp=l9

[grasswire]

76. U.S. Marshals.

If the RWNJ won't do their jobs, round them up.

[grasswire]

77. Reid must threaten new rule: no filibuster SCOTUS or legislation.

Boom II.

If they obstruct in any way, Boom II.

No filibuster allowed on SCOTUS nominations or legislation.

[Swede Atlanta]

78. So, absent a medical reason for not showing up for their job...

We excuse the quorum requirement AND we dismiss them from their job... We withhold their salary and benefits for one month on first infringement and for a second failure they are kicked off the payroll.