So, the Republicans voted as a block* not to end debate on Hagel’s nomination for SecDef.
I think we all know that Hagel is going to be confirmed. Even the Republicans are not saying they are blocking the nomination, per se, but that they need more time. More time for what? They all know him. It’s a simple vote.
So, what is the point? They can’t be trying to make Obama sweat, because he knows Hagel is going to be confirmed.
I guess the answer could be “they’re a bunch of idiots”, but I’m open to any supporters who think they can explain this and how it might make sense as a parliamentary procedure. As it is, I just can’t see it.
*almost 100%, but not quite. Still, I think we can call this a “block”.
Should that be “Republicans voted as a bloc to block Hagel’s nomination”?
Anyway, I think the biggest thing is that they want to do anything to waste time and attack Obama. They’re probably also hoping it’ll give Lindsey Graham and maybe a few other senators up in 2014 cover from a teabagger primary.
I just can’t figure out any conclusion the Republicans might have in mind that would be any sort of victory for them. I think, technically, they’re denying Harry Reid’s attempt to proceed with the nomination without unanimous consent. Reid is, I think playing hardball by not honoring any holds that members may have on the nomination. Filibustering a nomination for defense secretary is pretty unprecedented, but placing a hold in return for various concessions is accepted practice. Of course, the hold in question seems to be proving to Ted Cruz’s satisfaction that Hagel has never taken money from a terrorist front group that Breitbart Media made up called Friends of Hamas. I just don’t see any way for this to end that makes the Republicans not look like idiots to everyone that doesn’t have a Free Republic account. (Wow, that last sentence is a weird chain of negations, hope it sounds somewhat coherent.)
No, it’s not news. But they aren’t blocking everything as of late, and I’m just wondering what they hope to gain by this action. Maybe it’s nothing more than a bit of spiteful gamesmanship to make Hagel feel bad. But as I said in the OP, we all know he’s going to be confirmed. This isn’t going to be obstructed indefinitely.
Well Harry, I hope the filibuster reform deal you worked out with McConnell was worth it, to you and all the Dems who couldn’t muster up the 51 votes to eliminate it
Well, I hope he has an audience that that plays to, because the whole “Benghazi” thing is so 2012. It was a tragedy, for sure, but nobody except the partisan right nutjobs thinks this is something Americans are still interested about.
These guys need to let it go and move on, but maybe that’s asking too much.
Seriously? Hatch is mentioned once in the Bush-era article and I can’t see how it is consistent with that article that now he’s thinks Hagel should provide speech transcripts that may not even exist, but boy-howdy this time Hatch needs them to make up his mind this time about someone he worked with for years. Again: seriously? What am I missing?
It’s a gesture. A shot across the bow. A statement to the President and the Democratic Party. “We’re still here, pay us due respect or we’ll throw tantrums and make your life very uncomfortable.” Sure it’s childish, but 99% of politics from both sides is childish.
Hagel has excellent credentials and is, not only a Republican, but one who was rated as a “traditional Conservative” when he was Senator. That his nomination is supported unanimously by the Democrats, yet successfully filibustered by his own Republicans demonstrates (if further evidence were needed) that GOP behavior has passed beyond both tragedy and farce, to most resemble some Alice in Wonderland fantasy.
Hatch is not part of the filibuster to prevent an up-or-down vote. He spoke against the dems for doing it under Bush and he is against it now under Obama. What you might be missing is that by not voting present, the Republicans in question are creating the filibuster. While Hatch may have questions re: Hagel, he is not holding them up in procedural ways.
This is what the Republicans count on- the false equivalency that people naturally assume that both sides do it. They don’t. The Democrats have never acted like the Republicans currently do. As long as the people hang on to this mythical equivalence, the Republicans will continue to throw their tantrums.
That’s not how the filibuster works. It takes 3/5ths of Senators “sworn and sitting” to secure cloture; it has nothing to do with the number of Senators voting. In normal votes, voting “present” reduces the denominator, lowering the threshold for passage, but in cloture votes, voting present is as good as voting no. The only way for the filibuster to be avoided is for Republicans to choose not to filibuster, or, barring that, for 60 Senators to affirmatively vote for cloture. Voting “present” is just posturing while effectively voting to continue the filibuster (especially since the 60 votes would have been secured had Hatch voted yes).