For the very first time in American history, a cabinet nominee was brought to the Senate floor, filibustered by a minority of members, and came up short of 60 votes.
Former Republican Sen. Chuck Hagel of Nebraska, President Obama's choice to lead the Defense Department, faced fierce opposition from members of own party, and ultimately earned the support of 59 senators, which was one shy of what he needed to advance. (The Senate Majority Leader, for procedural reasons, had to switch his vote, so Hagel technically ended up with 58 votes.)
It appeared as recently as last week to have the necessary support to be confirmed, even in the event of a filibuster, but several GOP senators who said they'd allow an up-or-down vote changed their minds in recent days.
Indeed, as recently as Monday of this week, for example, Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) said a filibuster, if it were to occur, "sets a wrong precedent."
And then, today, McCain voted against cloture on Hagel anyway.
All 55 members of the Senate Democratic caucus backed Hagel, and they were joined by four Senate Republicans -- Johanns, Cochran, Collins, and Murkowski -- some of whom were prepared to oppose the nominee's confirmation, but each of whom opposed the filibuster.
Asked about her decision after her vote, Alaska's Lisa Murkowski said, "I said I was not going to support a filibuster and I stuck by my word." It's more than we can about some of her colleagues.
The fight is not, however, over.
Some of the Republicans who have blocked Hagel said this afternoon that they'll allow a vote on his nomination if the White House provides them with additional information about the Benghazi attack at some point over the next week. This is, in other words, the latest example of extortion politics -- Senate Republicans will be gracious enough to allow the institution to meet its constitutional obligations, permitting a possible vote on a Pentagon chief during a war, but only if they get something they want in return.
The Senate wasn't designed to work this way. For about two centuries, it didn't have to work this way. But the radicalization of the Republican Party has led to a political environment in which we end up using the word "unprecedented" an awful lot.
GOP obstructionism has reached epidemic levels in recent years. Today, to a historic degree, it got worse.
Leave a Comment:
The minority fascists have done it again. Do they have no shame? I am astonished and ashamed of our dysfunctional congress. If the republicans were to gain a senate majority, will the democrats exhibit such irrational behavior?
Do the republicans realize they are destroying our democratic government?
pcoleman31522 wrote:
"If the republicans were to gain a senate majority, will the democrats exhibit such irrational behavior?"
Is not that the only logical reason for Senator Reid's unwillingness to change the Senate rules?
The only unknown, in my mind, is whether Majority Leader McConnell will restrain himself from changing the filibuster rules at that time. I think it is 50:50.
If we just expelled the South, the country would work again.
I totally agree. To Hell with the South.
Let the south fall again.
I believe in intelligent discourse, but I tell you, I just want to pull out every filthy name in the book. i am so disgusted!
When will this end? Haven't the Republicans yet learned they are working against the majority of Americans?
Paula, Yes, but they simply do not give a damn.
When will the rule by the minority end in the Senate?
The Republican party gas gone absolutely crazy. They have a radical right of right agenda and need to be removed from office across the land.
Extortion politics indeed! Time to retire McCain and demonstrate that the people are in charge---NOT grumpy personal grudges.
This could push Arizona to go blue.
Can someone comment on this?
http://www.addictinginfo.org/2013/02/14/reid-puts-gop-in-the-corner-refuses-to-acknowledge-holds-on-obama-appointees/
Barbie Holtzman's link is Interesting. The articulated alignment of Holds and Filibusters. Now the Republicans look historically bad. But the election is over, so what is the point?. Mr. Hagel is so complex, he may walk rather than accept a recess appointment.
DoD should go on strike. No expenditures of any kind in any of the states where the filibustering senators live. Nothing. Turn the money spigot all the way off. Two can play at that game.
WHAT ON EARTH has obtaining more information on Benghazi have to do with confirming the Sec. of Defense nominee. HE HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH THAT.
I went to Reid's office the day his "filibuster" reform package went through, and told the staffer that it was a mistake. Got back a from letter about a week later. I'll write back, tell him that he should take the next election off. I'll pass on that senatorial vote next time.
Vile! Vile! Vile! I can think of no other word to describe the right-wing obstructionism that has become the expected behavior of the Republican Party. Do you folks not get it? Do you not understand that the majority of Americans support President Obama, as indicated by the overwhelming majority of electoral college votes he garnered on November 6, 2012? You'd better pray that your tea-party constituents are plentiful enough to ensure reelection in your next campaign, because the rest of America is OUT TO GET YOU! We will remove you from office if at all humanly possible.
They are Grumpy old wicked men that still want to be relevant.They will all expire pretty soon as many of them will not come back to the senate.
When Democrats now someday filibuster a GOP president's cabinet nominees, I want no kicking and screaming from Mr. Graham and company. As you sow, so you reap.
Apparently this is not unprecedented
http://thehill.com/blogs/congress-blog/the-administration/282335-its-not-unprecedented-to-filibuser-cabinet-nominees.
The Republican party is a party of old, white men. And those old, white man just cannot stand it that a black man is President. So they will do anything they can to demonstrate their hatred towards him. Sad but true.
I was waiting for the "black man is president" crap!! That really gets old. How about the plain fact that Obama isn't a good president?? It has NOTHING to do with his skin color. But irrelevant people like you like to make it a "white vs. black" thing. He was horrible his first term and he promises to be consistent his second term - high unemployment, high entitlements, a divided nation, deficit through the roof with NO CUTS.
i think we need to place the blame for the Hagel "hold" "filibuster" on the primary person at fault... Senator Reid... he had the opportunity to "set the rules of the Senate" on the first day of this session... he chose not to... as he has previously...it's not the republicans... it's the lack of leadership in the democratic leadership.
This just shows that every GOP candidate needs to be voted out of office they should all face a recall election. Otherwise the American People will have to wait until the November 2014 MidtermElection to get them out. This whole thing shows that the GOP is nothing more than a bunch of racist that can't admit defeat because the President happens to be Black. All at the cost of the American People. Truly embarassing and they have all broken the Oath of Office that they took. Recall everyone them get them out now.
Ahhh yes. RACISTS. Haven't heard that in a while!! Quit blaming others for the incompetence of your own party. Look specifically at one Harry Reid for starters. But you keep thinking that everyone with an R next to their name is a:
1. KKK Member
2. Tea Party Communist
3. Hates Black People
4. Racists
Throughout the broadcast day, between 5 a.m. and 11 p.m. EST, MSNBC showed a replay of Rubio's swig approximately 155 times — 101 of which came during "The Rachel Maddow Show," which played the moment on loop at the bottom of the screen for more than 13 minutes.
And they want to know why MSDNC cable news shows are so LOW RATED!!!
heres the idea folks .you hold up a vote on hagel for another couple of weeks. that puts you at, oh yes , sequester time. thats a chip you want to play in the bigger game. if sequester happens the gop is in deep dodo. since they were careful during mr. bushs reign to place a huge majority of the 'added' defense spending in the gop states, they stand to lose the most when sequester kicks in. and their handlers the business people, would be very unhappy. that doesn't mean they will lose any gop votes, because the people that vote for them really don't understand whats going on. perhaps they don't really care, either. but thats their problem. i find one thing interesting about the benghazi talk fest. if the ambassador had any info that he was in danger, why didn't he leave . there were planes at the airport. if he or any of his people who were on the ground there had any solid intel, him and his people should have just up and left. its funny that the gop never talks about the thousands killed and the tens of thousands injured in iraq. especially when the intel to go to war was a big lie! what about that? the trillions we spent, of course in gop states. but thats different right. wrong!when you create a war because your fiscal policy sucks, what else can you do. thank you to those who have served our country. and to those who have lied and stole from america, you don't deserve to be in public office!
Real Talk: CBO Director Tells Democrats Social Security is a Deficit Problem
Over the past few years, Democrats have clung to the idea that Social Security is a self-financing program that needs only tweaks to be fixed and, moreover, has not contributed at all to America's current debt and deficit problem. During Congressional Budget Office Director Doug Elmendorf's testimony to the Senate Budget Committee today, Democrat Jeff Merkley of Oregon prodded on this point.
"Is it fair to say," Sen. Merkley said, "that Social Security does not contribute to the national debt?"
"I don't think that's right, Senator," Elmendorf responded, before explaining the fiction of the accounting of the Social Security trust fund.
"The program is actually a drain on the budget today," Elmendorf said. Social Security does collect money from interest payments made to the Social Security trust fund, but "even taking the interest on board, in 2017, the combined trust funds will be running a deficit even including the interest payments they're receiving."
It could be that Democrats have entirely bought into their own line on Social Security, which would be troubling and runs counter to the facts. Prominent Democrats like Sens. Dick Durbin, Harry Reid, Jeanne Shaheen, and Chuck Schumer have all claimed in the past that Social Security is not a problem today. To be as fair as possible to the Democrats, they could have just been relying on outdated information. Before the recession hit in 2008, Social Security was scheduled to take in more money than it paid out nearly through 2020. The economic hit of the 2008 recession put such a hit on the federal budget that the timeframe moved up. Social Security bleeds red ink now.
"By 2023, there will be about 40% more people receiving Social Security and medicare benefits than there were last year," Elmendorf told the committee. "The biggest factor pushing up spending is the aging of the population."
The CBO director also said that the ramp-up in entitlement spending was possible over the last 40 years due to draw-downs in defense spending. The end of the Cold War saw the U.S. shifting money away from defense spending and toward domestic entitlement spending. "This country had an expansion in social security and health care programs paid for by a reduction in defense spending... that method of financing those programs isn't available on that order of magnitude."
In other words, the promised future level of benefits to an increasingly-retired American population will be difficult to sustain.
THE GOP, commonly known as the PON, (the Party of No) has now taken to eating it's own. Last year, they went after Governor Christie, now they have gone after Senator Hagel, same guy McCain loved during his failed run for the Presidency. When they figure out that Rubio can't deliver the Hispanic vote, they'll eat him up too.
The frequency of filibusters has increased by a factor of 50 percent over the last half-century: During the 1950s there was an average of one filibuster per Congress, while the 110th Congress alone (covering 2007 and 2008) had 52 filibusters. More broadly, delaying tactics like the filibuster were used on 8 percent of major legislation in the 1960s, but they were used on 70 percent in the 110th Congress. So there's no question that the filibuster is not now being used in the same way it has been traditionally. In the last year alone the filibuster has been used by the republicans 90 percent of the time.
I have been asking whether Congress (or a portion thereof, such as the GOP) can pass an unconstitutional law or otherwise act unconstitutionally? Some think the answer is yes, but each Senator (or Representative) who fails to satisfy the Constitutional Oath to benefit the .1% could be tried for treason to satisfy their Constitutional oath. The GOP has purposefully neutered the DOJ to limit such Constitutional suites that can challenge the .1%, and is abusing the process to purposefully break the legal, business, judicial, political, and other systems in every way they can conceive to destroy our Federal Government. We the People are the ones who can respond (according to the Constitution), since we are the bosses of everyone in the Legislative Branch, the Executive Branch, and the Judicial Branch (the Government of the people, by the people, and for the people).
How did the Government get off the idealistic track of Jefferson, Lincoln, Kennedy, and Obama and follow the dark side purposefully broken motives provided by the NRA and Republican Party? The profit motive, Government for sale! Bush/ Cheney were really focusing on the profit motives so their friends at Haliburton could reap amazing profits.
Many of us who are becoming ready to fight for our Constitutional rights against the corrupt money interest of Wall Street, the corrupt .1%, the GOP/Tea Party, and other anti-Constitutional forces. This is challenging the few corrupting ones who seem to get all the money. We will take this Constitutional challenge in the press-rooms, the blogs, as well as court rooms. Why do so many of the .1% think they are above the Constitution and the remainder of We the People? This Constitutional Challenge seems not only necessary to save our Democracy and the interest of 99.9% of We the People, but also seems to be one heck of a lot of fun.
Perhaps we should consider the corrupt .1% just like we did the leader of the first Confederacy "Jefferson Davis" after the Civil War, just another traitor. The anti-Constitutional .1% and the GOP had better get used to hearing and dealing with the term "traitor", because it fits so well.
Lindsay Graham and John McCain today
Profiles in Cowardice
How is it cowardice? Or do you even know what the word means??