Vote to End Debate On Bolton Scheduled for 6:00 PM Eastern

[ThomWV]

There will be another hour of debate from 5 until 6 and then the vote to end debate is scheduled. C-Span 2 if you please.

[me b zola]

1. .

:popcorn: :beer:

[Last Lemming]

2. What's the word?

is he going to get anointed?

[ThomWV]

3. Not Tonight

And probably not this week. There is a rumor afloat that Bush will appoint him over the 4th of July Recess. He's done it before, the filthy bastard.

[fooj]

4. Last that I heard was that if the WH didn't get an up or down vote

on Bolton today, Shrub was going to by-pass the Senate and approve him anyway. WTF is the purpose of these govt. institutions if Shrub marginalizes them at every opportunity? Why have "checks and balances"...


Understand it will be a "recess" appointment!

peace.

[goclark]

5. Do the Democrats have the votes to stop the appointment tonight?

[ThomWV]

6. Pretty Sure They Do

I don't think there's much chance of debate being closed tonight.

[LittleClarkie]

7. They cry about using the filibuster in ways it hadn't been used before

(well, if you hadn't erased every other avenue, all the other avenues you used against Clinton nominees, they wouldn't have to resort to the filibuster, you bastards).

But there's nothing wrong apparently in using a recess appointment in a way it's never been used before.

Boy, that should make Bolton's job fun, eh? People at the UN knowing he had to be appointed because nobody wanted the fucker?

------------------------------------
Here I come people:


Are we gonna have fun or what? Heheheh.

[Internut]

10. Are you saying that recess appointments

were never used before by any president? I seem to remember judges, ambassadors, etc. being recess-appointed by presidents before. Wasn't Thurgood Marshall recess-appointed?

[bicentennial_baby]

11. The law says

that recess appts. may only be made if the vacancy occurs during the said recess, not before...someone posted the text earlier.

[Internut]

20. Here is some info

http://www.senate.gov/reference/resources/pdf/RS21308.pdf

The wording of the constitutional provision allowing recess appointments leads to a question about which positions could actually be filled that way. The question revolves around the phrase “Vacancies that may happen during the Recess of the Senate.” Does “happen” mean “happen to exist” or “happen to occur”? The first meaning would allow the President to make recess appointments to any position that becomes vacant prior to the recess and continues to be vacant during the recess, as well as positions that become vacant during the recess. The second meaning would allow recess appointments only to positions that become vacant during the recess. Although this question was a source of controversy in the early nineteenth century, Attorneys General and courts have now long supported the first, broader interpretation of the phrase.



http://congress.indiana.edu/learn_about/topic/rc_qa.php#recess_appt

...

President George W. Bush has made 42 recess appointments in just over 3 years in office. President Clinton made 140 recess appointments in his two terms. The first President Bush made 77 recess appointments during his 4 year tenure. In 8 years as President, Ronald Reagan made 240 such appointments. President Carter made 68 recess appointments during his 4 years in office.

...

The original purpose behind granting the President the power of recess appointments was to get around a practical problem. At the time the Constitution was written, it was expected that Congress would have short sessions and long periods of adjournment. Sessions were sometimes delayed because difficult travel conditions meant waiting a long time for enough Senators to arrive to assemble a quorum. The power given the President to make recess appointments was granted so that he wouldn?t be without top officials of government for long periods while waiting for the Senate to assemble.

Today, Congress meets for longer periods throughout the year, with shorter recesses. The motivation for recess appointments is rarely scheduling concerns any longer. Recess appointments are now more often made to circumvent the Senate confirmation process. However, Presidents have to balance the political advantages of appointing individuals the Senate has not acted upon, with the risks of alienating the Senate when it comes to future appointments.

All modern Presidents have made recess appointments both during the shorter breaks within a session of Congress as well as during the longer recess between the two sessions. Senate leaders have frequently complained about the appointments made during short intra-session recesses. Some have threatened to litigate the matter to the Supreme Court, but none have yet done that. A federal appeals court did rule in 1962 that the President had broad authority to make recess appointment decisions .

[seemslikeadream]

13. How Long Must the Senate Be in Recess Before a President May Make a Recess

And this excerpt from a Congressional Research Service document is worth reading again:

How Long Must the Senate Be in Recess Before a President May Make a Recess Appointment?
The Constitution does not specify the length of time that the Senate must be in recess before the President may make a recess appointment. Over the last century, as shorter recesses have become more commonplace, Attorneys General and Offices of Legal Counsel have offered differing views on this issue. Most recently, in 1993, a Department of Justice brief implied that the President may make a recess appointment during a recess of more than three days.

Appointments made during short recesses (less than 30 days), however, have sometimes aroused controversy, and they may involve a political cost for the President. Controversy has been particularly acute in instances where Senators perceive that the President is using the recess appointment process to circumvent the confirmation process for a nominee who is opposed in the Senate. Although President Theodore Roosevelt once made recess appointments during an intersession recess of less than one day, the shortest length of a recess during which appointments have been made during the past 20 years was 10 days.


More shortly on the talking points those opposing Bolton and cloture on his nomination are distributing. . .
http://www.thewashingtonnote.com/

[LittleClarkie]

14. I read over the weekend that it had never been used in THIS way

I assumed they meant for ambassador to the UN.

[Internut]

21. How is recess-appointing ambassador to the UN different from

doing the same to Supreme Court Justices, federal judges, ambassadors, etc?

[LittleClarkie]

22. I read in a news article that didn't specify

considering the dignity and level of diplomacy needed for such a post, one would think that it would be best if such a person didn't have to be rammed down people's throats.

[seemslikeadream]

8. Market Betting Against Bolton Confirmation

he Bolton market at TradeSports.com is dropping dramatically. The chances of Bolton now getting through as Ambassador to the United Nations are measured by the market at 45% chance of confirmation.

This is amazing as he was considered quite likely, 95% likely at the end of May, and then hovered around 90% through early June -- after which it has been plummeting since.

We are winning.
http://www.thewashingtonnote.com/

[kansasblue]

9. It started early

[DistressedAmerican]

12. Just Say No to Buttweasels!

[seemslikeadream]

15. Theatre of the Absurd: Why is Frist Mounting a Cloture Vote

that he knows he's going to lose?
There are two reasons why this cloture vote on Bolton is taking place today.

First, Frist wants to try and paint Democrats opposing John Bolton as obstructionists, but the media covering the Bolton nomination are clearly not letting Frist have his way on that claim. The major media do get the reality that the White House has FAILED TO BUDGE on any of the three outstanding, legitimate document requests made by Senators of the Executive Branch.

The second reason is "grand theatre". Frist wants to demonstrate that all steps were taken to try and get Bolton through, so "going through the motions" even the White House (and Frist) will again lose -- is an important part of the political process. This failure that TWN thinks will occur in the next 30 or so minutes gives the White House the excuse to either make a recess appointment -- or better yet, to withdraw John Bolton from consideration for this Ambassadorship at the United Nations.

-- Steve Clemons
http://www.thewashingtonnote.com/

[POAS]

19. Two words, recess appointment

[me b zola]

16. Voinivich voted 'no'

:)

[me b zola]

17. Jeffords "no"

[babylonsister]

18. Hagel could garner attention w/a 'no'-has he voted yet? nt

[fooj]

23. What's with Landrieu? Does she EVER vote with the Dems?

:banghead: