The National  Memo Logo

Smart. Sharp. Funny. Fearless.

Monday, December 09, 2019 {{ new Date().getDay() }}

Washington (AFP) – The U.S. Senate took the potentially explosive step Thursday of changing its rules to allow executive and lower court nominees to be approved by a simple majority vote.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid invoked the move, known in Washington as the “nuclear option,” to end what he considered long-standing abuses of blocking procedures that for more than two centuries have required a 60-vote threshold — instead of a simple majority vote — to overcome.

The so-called filibuster would remain intact for Supreme Court nominations and for all legislation.

The move could dramatically ease the bottleneck on stalled nominees including federal judges, but lawmakers worry it could almost certainly curtail the influence of the party in the Senate minority and lead to an escalation of partisanship.

They also warned it would dramatically boost the partisan nature of presidential picks — regardless of which party holds the White House.

“I think you’ll see harder-edged partisan choices, and the filter that exists today to kind of weed those folks out is going to be less,” said Republican Senator Lindsey Graham.

The Senate vote was 52-48, with three Democrats voting against the rules change. A motion to overturn the change failed.

Republican were livid about the sudden moves by Reid, who earlier this year made similar threats to use the nuclear option, but it was averted with a last-minute compromise.

“This is a power grab,” argued Senator Lamar Alexander. “It’s another partisan political maneuver to permit the Democratic majority to do whatever it wants to do.

“In this case it’s to advance the president’s regulatory agenda, and the only cure for it that I know is an election,” he said.

Republicans contend that Reid used complex procedural tactics to break Senate rules that require that any changes to those rules be made by a super-majority of two-thirds of senators.

AFP Photo/Mladen Antonov

Start your day with National Memo Newsletter

Know first.

The opinions that matter. Delivered to your inbox every morning

Attorney General Merrick Garland

The coming weeks will be the most consequential of Merrick Garland's life — not just for the attorney general himself but for our country. Garland will have to decide, presumably with the support of President Joe Biden, how to address the looming authoritarian threat of former President Donald J. Trump and his insurrectionary gang. His first fateful choice will be how to deal with Stephen K. Bannon, the fascism-friendly, criminally pardoned former Trump senior adviser who has defied a subpoena from the House Select Committee investigating the events of Jan. 6.

That panel has issued a contempt citation of Bannon, which will reach the floor for approval by the full House early next week. When that resolution passes, as it assuredly will, Speaker Nancy Pelosi will ask the U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia to open a prosecution of Bannon, which could ultimately cost him a year behind bars and a fine of $100,000. (Trump won't be able to deliver a pardon, as he did last January to save Bannon from prison for defrauding gullible Trumpists in a "build the wall" scheme.)

Keep reading... Show less

By Lisa Richwine and Bhargav Acharya

LOS ANGELES (Reuters) - A union that represents about 60,000 behind-the-scenes workers in film and television reached a tentative deal with producers on Saturday, averting a strike that threatened to cause widespread disruption in Hollywood, negotiators said.

Keep reading... Show less
x
{{ post.roar_specific_data.api_data.analytics }}