Senate Republicans Block Two Obama Nominees

[onehandle]

Last edited Thu Oct 31, 2013, 01:47 PM - Edit history (1)

Source: New York Times

WASHINGTON — Senate Republicans on Thursday blocked the confirmation of two of President Obama’s nominees, one to a powerful appeals court and another to a housing lending oversight post, setting up a confrontation with Democrats that could escalate into a larger fight over limiting the filibuster and restricting how far the minority party can go to thwart a president’s agenda.

The Senate voted 55 to 38 to move forward with the nomination of Patricia Ann Millett to the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, five votes short of the 60 required to break the Republican filibuster. Forty Republicans opposed the nomination, three voted “present” and two joined Democrats in supporting her. The vote to advance the nomination of Representative Melvin Watt, Democrat of North Carolina, to become the head of the Federal Housing Finance Agency was 56 to 42, four votes short. Forty-one Republicans opposed Mr. Watt, and two supported him.

Republican objections to Ms. Millet, however, had nothing to do with her judicial temperament or political leanings. Instead, Republicans say they want to refuse Mr. Obama any more appointments to the appeals court, which is widely recognized as second only to the Supreme Court in importance and often rules on the legality of executive branch actions.

“Our Democratic colleagues and the administration’s supporters have been actually pretty candid,” said Senator Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, the Republican leader. “They’ve admitted they want to control the court so it will advance the president’s agenda.”

Read more: http://www.nytimes.com/2013/11/01/us/politics/senate-republicans-block-2-obama-nominees.html

[Mz Pip]

1. Let me guess...

BENGHAZI !!!!!!!!!!

[beerandjesus]

2. Man, they're BEGGING for the nuclear option....

I hope Harry Reid obliges them... he certainly left the door open in his interview with Rachel!

[The Stranger]

16. The door's been open for almost a decade now.

When is Harry going to get the balls to walk through it?

[QuestForSense]

17. The second he pries his head out of his ass.

[Orrex]

18. So... We're back to hating Harry again?

I swear I can never tell which way the wind is blowing.

[QuestForSense]

19. No, no.

Just a little tough love.

[Orrex]

21. Oh, ok. That's fair.

[The Stranger]

20. We are trying to get him to lead, to take a stand, to fight for us.

Instead, it's always mealy-mouthed, confused, nearly apologetic speeches that play into the other side's hands over and over and over and over and over again.

We need to reach our potential base with our policies, and he either doesn't get it or can't do it.

The greatest reason why the Democrats don't control all three branches of the federal government is lack of information.

The media will continue to fuck us, so when our leaders get a chance, it is that much more crucial that they reach the potential base out there.

[bobGandolf]

22. Enough with the nuclear option threats......just F&^%$ING DO IT! N/T

[LibGranny]

3. They must not believe in KARMA!

[heaven05]

4. they promised to obstruct and destroy Obama

six long years ago. Obstruct they have, in spades. Mean, vicious people with one agenda, make the black POTUS a failure so no one can say he was better than the shrub, reagan, shrub senior and the the 'crook'. Obstruct sure, Obamas legacy of some good done, guaranteed. Fuck the teanazis and their rethug lapdogs. on edit: by the way he IS better than any of those clowns previously mentioned in this response.

[Dopers_Greed]

5. They've succeeded

The Teapublicans have managed to destroy Obama's presidency. He has little to show for all the years he's been in office, other than the fact that things would be way worse if we had gotten McCain or McBain administrations.

[handmade34]

6. boy, are you wrong...

President Obama has accomplished a lot… the Republicans have just kept him from accomplishing additional things he wants and we as citizens need

[heaven05]

11. +1000

[obnoxiousdrunk]

15. +100.

[SaveAmerica]

7. My husband, who would have gone to Iraq a couple times by now, would disagree

[heaven05]

12. +1000

[SaveAmerica]

8. My son, who is in college and covered by our healthcare, would disagree

[SaveAmerica]

9. And every other person who has benefitted in one way or other, would disagree

And President Obama has done these and other beneficial things although the Tea Party and their enablers have tried to block his every move.

[heaven05]

13. +1000

[Dopers_Greed]

28. You are right

I went a little overboard with the hyperbole. It's just disgusting to read that Obama's poll numbers are sinking to almost Bush levels because of all the faux scandals the Tea Bag Party and M$M are beating to death.

[lark]

10. Repugs already set the bar low on this one!

Harry Reid is a total asshole if he allows this to pass. When shrub was pResident Repugs said judicial nominees got up or down vote or filibuster would be eliminated, Dems should do the same with these - then actually do it!! There is no comity, there's only Dems bending over and letting the Repugs screw them and us over and over. So far beyond time to stop this insanity.

[heaven05]

14. +10000

[Roarybeans]

23. Grateful to our President

Those of us in the LGBT civil rights movement recognize the this President has done more than all the others rolled together to advance the cause. He is not a failed President to me.

[Scuba]

24. With Harry Reid's help.

[starroute]

25. As if Bush hadn't already stacked the courts duringhis own term

This from a 2008 article in the New York Times:

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/29/us/29judges.html?pagewanted=all

His administration has transformed the nation’s federal appeals courts, advancing a conservative legal revolution that began nearly three decades ago under President Ronald Reagan.

On Oct. 6, Mr. Bush pointed with pride to his record at a conference sponsored by the Cincinnati chapter of the Federalist Society, the elite network for the conservative legal movement. He noted that he had appointed more than a third of the federal judiciary expected to be serving when he leaves office, a lifetime-tenured force that will influence society for decades and that represents one of his most enduring accomplishments. While a two-term president typically leaves his stamp on the appeals courts — Bill Clinton appointed 65 judges, Mr. Bush 61 — Mr. Bush’s judges were among the youngest ever nominated and are poised to have an unusually strong impact. ...

Republican-appointed judges, most of them conservatives, are projected to make up about 62 percent of the bench next Inauguration Day, up from 50 percent when Mr. Bush took office. They control 10 of the 13 circuits, while judges appointed by Democrats have a dwindling majority on just one circuit.

David M. McIntosh, a co-founder and vice-chairman of the Federalist Society, said the nation’s appeals courts were now more in line with a conservative judicial ideology than at any other time in memory.

[starroute]

26. And more from a recent article at Think Progress

http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2013/09/11/2603401/assume-dead-conservative-bush-appointed-judge-just-fool-chuck-grassley/

Judge Timothy Tymkovich is a very conservative judge. A George W. Bush appointee to a federal appellate court, Tymkovich recently authored an opinion giving religious conservatives sweeping ability to ignore laws they object to on religious grounds. His opinion not only would allow such conservatives the ability to deny birth control coverage to their employees, it even includes some language suggesting that religious employers could object to laws ensuring “gender equality.”

Yet, at a hearing Monday in the Senate Judiciary Committee, Tymkovich subtly revealed that an effort by the top Republican on the Judiciary Committee to prevent President Obama from confirming three nominees to a powerful court is rooted entirely in false shoddy reasoning.

The United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit is the second most powerful court in the country, and it is currently a bastion of conservative skepticism to environmental laws, workplace protections and similar laws. Grassley proposed eliminating three open seats from this court — a proposal that would ensure that the court remains staunchly conservative. Rather than arguing directly that three seats should be stripped from a powerful court to keep that court in Republican hands, however, Grassley offered the rationale that the DC Circuit has a lower caseload — at least in terms of raw numbers — while the Second and Eleventh Circuits both have high caseloads. Thus, Grassley’s proposal would not just eliminate seats from the DC Circuit, it would add one seat each to the Second and Eleventh.

Judge Tymkovich, however, was at the Senate in his capacity as chair of the federal judicial committee that evaluates which federal courts are truly in need of additional judgeships — i.e. which courts are overworked and which courts are underworked. Tymkovich’s committee did not recommend eliminating a single seat — much less three — from the DC Circuit. Nor did it recommend that seats be added to the Second and Eleventh Circuits, as Grassley has proposed. It did recommend adding two federal appellate seats, but its recommendation was that these seats should be added to the Sixth and Ninth Circuits. In other words, a neutral panel of judges led by a staunchly conservative Bush appointee evaluated the judiciary’s needs and came up with numbers that in no way resemble Grassley’s recommendation.

[lostincalifornia]

27. Good, let the repukes put the last nail in their coffin