Tweet
If you’re like me, you believed that the Senate rules reform effort devolved into nothingness. Only a few things were accomplished on the periphery:
• Senators could not force the reading of amendments as long as they were public for 72 hours. This almost never happened anyway.
• Senate confirmations for hundreds of appointees would be phased out. The legislation to that effect has been negotiated by the leadership of both parties and introduced, but nothing has officially received a vote yet, and there’s a question of whether it ever will.
• There was a “gentleman’s agreement” where the Republicans promised not to filibuster the motion to proceed on legislation, and Democrats allowed more amendments to legislation. Republicans have completely abused the amendment agreement, turning every bill into a Christmas tree for ideological votes, and have of late stopped the practice of allowing legislation to the floor without a cloture vote on the motion to proceed. As a result, the Senate has become a slow, steady confirmation factory for federal judges (many of which haven’t been filibustered, in keeping with part of the gentleman’s agreement) and pretty much nothing else.
• Finally, secret holds were banned. I know they were. This got a vote of 92-4. One of the four who voted against it was John Ensign, who isn’t even there anymore. Secret holds, where Senators could anonymously place a hold on any nomination, legislation, amendment or motion to proceed, requiring a cloture vote to clear those measures, were dead. Kaput. Ex-holds. Done.
Or, not.
Heather Higginbottom’s nomination to be President Obama’s deputy budget director is in deep trouble after the GOP placed a hold on it, Democrat aides said Friday.
Because of the secret hold, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) cannot move the nomination to the floor for a vote under unanimous consent.
Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-Ala.), the ranking member on the Senate Budget Committee, views Higginbottom as entirely unqualified for the position. Democrat aides point to Sessions as a source of the hold, but his office would not confirm that Friday.
Um, wait a second, this was barred by a 92-4 vote in the Senate! Now, that vote was a standing order and not an official rule change, so that could account for this. Whether Higginbottom will or will not get a vote in the Senate is immaterial to the fact that secret holds have reared their ugly heads again.
It was always unclear to me what the enforcement to stop secret holds would be. Perhaps if some Senator comes to the floor and asks who is holding the nomination, Sessions will be “forced” to own up. But the secret hold perseveres prior to that, as long as nobody admits to the hold.
Even the most fragile and meaningless of Senate rules reforms have become more fragile and more meaningless.
24 Comments
Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About FDL News Desk
Kabuki. Comity.
Worthy only of complete contempt.
Now why do we have a Senate (by Jon Walker, Jan. 10, 2011)?
This surprises anyone?
Huh. Interesting.
Well, at least it’s nice to get my worldview validated every now and then.
Just like the filibuster, the “secret holds” are only “rules” as long as the party in power CHOOSES to allow them.
So, if a Republican uses a “secret hold” and gets away with it, it’s entirely because the Democrats CHOOSE to allow it.
Those are FACTS, not opinions.
If the Democrats decided to do away with secret holds and filibusters TODAY, there’s not a thing ANYONE could do about it. Sue??? No way the judicial gets involved in the rule making of the legislative. Have the executive “enforce” something??? Again, no way.
It would sure be nice if more folks on the left would stop pluggin their ears and yelling “La la la I can’t hear you” to those FACTS so that we can start working together to improve this mess instead of continuing to fight each other. But if working together means I have to ignore reality, much like the Republicans do, then sorry, I can’t work with those folks.
The reality is the Democrats can change ALL of these obnoxious Senate rules TODAY. If they CHOSE. And when they don’t, it’s because they CHOOSE not to. Hell, as far as the filibuster rule is concerned, the Republicans have already admitted the majority has that power when they themselves threatened to do it.
Agree with prior comments. Just more dog ‘n pony show. None of these super wealthy entitled “politicians” cares to change anything bc they can all scurry for cover under whatever “rules” they choose to adhere to on any given day, whilst equally ignoring the same “rules” on some other day, when that suits them. It’s all bogus.
We’ve already duly noted that when “Dems” got in power, suddenly they needed a min. of 60 votes to have a “majority.” WTF?? And there were some who were pushing for it to be 80 votes to be a majority.
Of course, the T-GOPers clapped and cheered for this outrageous nonsense, but that’s bc RushGlennSarah told them it was all part of “God’s plan” or something (no offense to people of faith, but Glenn Beck, at least, said words to that effect).
Whatever… rules, schmules…. they’re made to be broken or hidden behind as the PTB demand.
When will the Democrats wake up and realize that the Republicans are not “gentlemen” or “ladies” and will renege on any agreement and attempt to circumvent any law? Never, obviouly
This is because Senator Wormer had already placed Heather Higginbottom on double secret probation. There’s a little known codicil in the Senate rules that allow Senators to do that.
Nothing I can add to this.
Oy – I just spent the last couple hours proofing and grooming my Senate data (Like I did for the House) and turn FDL back on and see this.
Blergh.
*note to self – must crack senate e-mail schema so we can send blast messages to all 100 of them at a time and annoy the shit out of them*
So glad to hear your good news!! Hoorah for you.
What good news Peg? Job? Crossing fingers toes and everything a I can at once fer ya.. Including me eyes..
Yep. Looks like barring unforeseen complications I’m employed,
That’s such great news!
If Harry Reid is honoring a secret hold, it’s Harry Reid who is violating the rule that passed 92-4. He’s at fault, not the Senator who put on the secret hold.
For those of you on Twitter – please help me crack the Senate email address schema so we can mass email the whole Senate – OFTEN and with GREAT IMPUNITY!
Tweet this and send me Twitter responses please to @KellyCDenver:
If the Constitution weren’t the irredeemable shambles it is today, my idea to save the country would be to take the greater portion of the rule-making power away from Congress, incorporate the important rules into the Constitution, and deny Congress the power to tamper with the basics. It might not be stirring, like, “We, the People…”, but it might have helped keep us from getting where we are.
It’s too late now. Nothing would help. Maybe they’ll take my advice on the next go-round.
Out…standing!
Actually, I think the only way to save/restore/reform the country is a series of Constitutional amendments that would act as fences and keep the politicians on the farm.
The only way to achieve this would be by getting initiative petitions calling for a Constitutional convention (on specific amendments) passed in all the states where citizens can proposes initiatives. The publicity from this movement would put pressure on legislatures in other, non-initiative, states. This, in turn, would scare the shit out of everybody but the common concern over a Constitutional Convention is that it might be hijacked, go off the reservation, and radically alter or repeal the good parts of the existing Constitution.
This would be a lengthy process, probably taking a decade (two Presidential election cycles plus some additional time). The initiative measures in each state would have to be identical down to the last period and comma, and the instructions to the Convention delegates would have to be very specific so that the true reforms in the initiatives could not be amended/gutted by the Convention delegates.
my bold:
how exactly are the republicans requiring the democrats to file cloture?
if it’s by threatening to filibuster… i can’t see how that actually forces the democrats to file cloture. there is the alternative of calling the republican’s bluff and seeing if they will actually attempt a filibuster.
my working hypothesis is that the democrats in the senate aren’t being forced to file cloture (there’s nothing in the rules i can find to support such a claim). so, i guess it’s a just a bullshit excuse for us rubes,
propogandaparty messaging to “explain” why the poor Ds in the senate can’t do what they were elected to do.Precisely. The “hold” rule, whatever its current incarnation, is only as good as the leadership’s willingness to uphold it. The GOP were markedly reserved about actually upholding them. And here, we have a 92-4 vote to act one way, and now Reid is honoring entirely different conduct. What’s going on, Mr. Fighting Harry Reid?
Congratulations. Looking forward to your having less time to join us here, but for good reasons.
Actually, they just banned everyone in the Senate from telling anyone else that the measure to ban secret bans actually failed by the opposite margin to the one they told everyone it passed by.
And the vote to ban everyone from telling passed unanimously.
And you have to let everyone give you a noogie if you tell.
What’s funny is that the Senate filibuster we have all come to loathe came about because of meaningless reform the Senate rules!
If I recall my history correctly here: A president died back in the 1800s (can’t remember which one), so the Speaker of the House of Reps. became the Vice President (aka President of the Senate). He thought the Senate rules were much too complicated and cumbersome, compared to House rules, so he suggested to “get rid of” some things in the rules. One of the things that was removed was the ability for Senators to call for a vote to bring debate to an end (similar to how the House operates).
When that provision died, the filibuster was born; albeit it wasn’t until more recent decades that the true, horrible obstructionist nature of it was abused and the Senate adopted the cloture motion to try and fight it. Today, gentleman’s “unanimous consent” agreements are arranged behind closed doors.
Try watching the Senate in action (C-SPAN2) for a few days and the first question you might ask yourself is, “What the fuck is a quorum call, and why are they wasting their time sitting there for so long during it?” Even when Senators speak on the floor, there aren’t usually other Senators there besides the acting President, so it seems dishonest to call it “debate”.
As you may be able to tell, I have a low opinion of the Senate. My perception is that every day way too much damn time is wasted. There is likely a lot of discussion going on in the “cloakrooms”, but in the public eye I see a serious need to for Senators to suck it up, let go of the “power” of the filibuster, and sit at their desks where they can do some damn work.