This is not accurate. The assignments to the committees come through an organizing resolution passed by the entire senate which can and almost certainly would be filibustered.
This is not accurate. The assignments to the committees come through an organizing resolution passed by the entire senate which can and almost certainly would be filibustered.The GOP can't filibuster committee chairs. Each party assigns , thru a resolutions it's committee members. This includes the judicial committee. If she is removed, they would just have to assign someone else to fill the vacant seat from the party.
They can't obstruct a replacement.. The only committee members the GOP has anything to do with is the 10 they pick as the minority party.As long as the GOP obstruct a replacement for the committee she's stuck till her term ends. Running in the first place in 18 instead of retiring was the mistake and it can't be undone now.
Nope.This is not accurate. The assignments to the committees come through an organizing resolution passed by the entire senate which can and almost certainly would be filibustered.
Can you show me the source of this information? It goes against everything I have read on the issue.Nope!
You are correct that committee members are elected by the full senate, I misunderstood the assigning of members by party, and what it was saying. I apologize. However, committee members are usually those with the most seniority, with each party choosing their members, and it is done by ballot, there is no option of filibustering that I can see, as it's not put up to the full senate to debate.Can you show me the source of this information? It goes against everything I have read on the issue.
As per the article:You are correct that committee members are elected by the full senate, I misunderstood the assigning of members by party, and what it was saying. I apologize. However, committee members are usually those with the most seniority, with each party choosing their members, and it is done by ballot, there is no option of filibustering that I can see, as it's not put up to the full senate to debate.
Senators are formally elected to standing committees by the entire membership of the Senate
I already said you where right about the full senate (actually it's senate aquarium, which is 51 Senators minimum) did you not read that in my response? It's not a vote that goes the floor for debate. the vote is called for the committee chairs which are assigned their respective party, and done by ballot, and the results are tallied. I don't see any avenue that allows a path to filibuster. Electing committee seats isn't like having a floor discussion/debate and vote for legislation, or judge's nominee where they ask them questions and decide to confirm them.As per the article:
Any new member of the judiciary committee would require a full vote, which means it can be filibustered. The odds of republicans filibustering it seem extremely high.
I guess I’m not understanding you then? Any full vote by the senate can be filibustered unless it’s explicitly exempted like judges or budget reconciliation. This would be a vote like any other.I already said you where right about the full senate (actually it's senate aquarium, which is 51 Senators minimum) did you not read that in my response? It's not a vote that goes the floor for debate. the vote is called for the chairs made up by the Senators chosen by their respective party, and done by ballot, and the results are tallied. I don't see any avenue that allows a path to filibuster. Electing committee seats isn't like having a floor discussion and vote for legislation, or judge's nominee where they ask them questions and decide to confirm them.
What is a filibuster.. it's unlimited debate time. There is no floor debate in committee chair elections.I guess I’m not understanding you then? Any full vote by the senate can be filibustered unless it’s explicitly exempted like judges or budget reconciliation. This would be a vote like any other.
There usually isn’t but that’s because everyone just agrees to skip it. If a member insists on debate, and one absolutely would, filibuster time.What is a filibuster.. it's unlimited debate time. There is not debate in committee seat elections.
Where did you pull that idea from? Any debating that takes place where committee chairs are concerned, is within the party when they assign their party members to those chairs. All the vote in the full Senate is for is to say "yes, I agree with these assignments, or I don't". There is nothing for them to debate because they have no say in who the other party assigns to those chairs. All they get to do, is vote to accept or not accept those assignments, that's it.There usually isn’t but that’s because everyone just agrees to skip it. If a member insists on debate, and one absolutely would, filibuster time.
Right and a new senator would need assignments, which require a vote, which would be filibustered.Where did you pull that idea from? Any debating that takes place where committee chairs are concerned, is within the party when they assign their party members to those chairs. All the vote in the full Senate is for is to say "yes, I agree with these assignments, or I don't". There is nothing for them to debate because they have no say in who the other party assigns to those chairs. All they get to do, is vote to accept or not accept those assignments, that's it.
Where do they get those assignments? Answer: From their party, if the party has any open committee chairs, assignments are not dictated by the Full Senate, or the other party. All the Full Senate vote is for is "yes" or "no" I accept their assignment.. There is NO debate.Right and a new senator would need assignments, which require a vote, which would be filibustered.
Until a member says ‘I would like to debate this’.Where do they get those assignments? Answer: From their party, via the parties open committee chairs, it is not dictated by the Full Senate, or the other party. All the Full Senate vote is for is "yes" or "no" I accept their assignment.. There is NO debate.
how do you debate something that can't be debated by the full senate? There is nothing for the full senate to debate because neither party gets to dictate who the other party assigns to committee chairs, that is all done within the party. All the full senate does is vote to agree or disagree with the assignments, and majority wins the vote.Until a member says ‘I would like to debate this’.
Where are you getting the idea this can’t be debated from? That’s just wrong.how do you debate something that can't be debated by the full senate? There is nothing for the full senate to debate because neither party gets to dictate who the other party assigns to committee chairs, that is all done within the party. All the full senate does is vote to agree or disagree with the assignments, and majority wins the vote.
IF you say so.. but if that is true.. why have we NEVER had a debate or a filibuster for committee chair assignments? Is it because those committee chair assignments are given by the party in which those chairs represent, and not by the full Senate? could it also be because the rules are also different based on the Party who has the majority?Where are you getting the idea this can’t be debated from? That’s just wrong.
Wouldn’t have helped. They still would have filibustered her replacement.She should've stepped down when the D's held both sides of congress.
If replacements can be filibustered how does ANYONE manage to get seated?Wouldn’t have helped. They still would have filibustered her replacement.
They are generally uncontroversial and nobody cares. The reason here is the right cares a HUGE amount about judges and so the prospect of being able to block all further judicial appointments despite not controlling the senate is very attractive to them.If replacements can be filibustered how does ANYONE manage to get seated?
They are generally uncontroversial and nobody cares. The reason here is the right cares a HUGE amount about judges and so the prospect of being able to block all further judicial appointments despite not controlling the senate is very attractive to them.
Once again, the Dems need to kill the filibuster. Mitch doesn’t hesitate to waive it as suits his agenda and the Dems need to stop shooting themselves in the face and use the authorities that the voters entrusted in them.