Democratic Senator Says He Will Block Trump Nominees Until USAID Is Back
Source: WSJ via MSN
WASHINGTONSen. Brian Schatz (D., Hawaii) said he would place a blanket hold on all of President Trumps State Department nominees until his administrations attack on the leading foreign-assistance agency ends, a move that threatens to stall Trumps ability to get his foreign-policy team in place.
Schatzs threat came as Elon Musks Department of Government Efficiency aims to close the U.S. Agency for International Development; the agencys existence as an independent government organization is codified in federal law. Over the weekend, DOGE staffers forced their way into USAIDs headquarters in downtown Washington, gaining access to classified information and closing the building to employees on Monday. Around 60 senior-level staff were already placed on administrative leave.
Schatz said he would block any of Trumps diplomatic confirmations until USAID is again allowed to operate normally and the administration ceases its authoritarian behavior. Such a hold would halt the chambers ability to move bills quickly, and require Senate Majority Leader John Thune to use precious floor time to ram the presidents nominees through the confirmation process.
I will oppose unanimous consent. I will vote no. I will do maximal delays until this is resolved, he told The Wall Street Journal in an interview.
Read more: https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/democratic-senator-says-he-will-block-trump-nominees-until-usaid-is-back/ar-AA1ylb38

WhiteTara
(30,351 posts)orangecrush
(22,988 posts)Glad one of them is using some of the power they have left! Wish more of our representatives would take similar action. Why are none of them doing something similar about Musk routing around our government's pay system???
mpcamb
(3,030 posts)Linda ladeewolf
(633 posts)Them call in some law enforcement on musk. Something! Get a court order to stop him, anything would be nice!
Ray Bruns
(4,931 posts)And please let Tommy Tuberville chime in at some point.
Bengus81
(7,891 posts)LearnedHand
(4,450 posts)Someone has discovered the tactics Republicans use VERY SUCCESSFULLY.
Baitball Blogger
(49,107 posts)I am not familiar with this process.
spooky3
(36,894 posts)Nominees.
Baitball Blogger
(49,107 posts)Aristus
(69,035 posts)If the nominees don't get out of committee, the Senate can't vote on them, IIRC.
Baitball Blogger
(49,107 posts)Wiz Imp
(3,501 posts)Unanimous consent is typically used on non-controversial nominees or legislation to bypass the full approval process which takes more time. From a CRS Report on holds (https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/R/R43563) :
request is proposed on the floor, any Senator may object to it. If objection is heard, the consent
request does not take effect. Efforts to modify the original request may be undertakena process
that can require extensive negotiations between and among Senate leaders and their colleagues
but there is no guarantee that a particular objection can be addressed to the satisfaction of all
Senators
The Senate hold emerges from within this context of unanimous-consent decision-making as a
method of transmitting policy or scheduling preferences to Senate leaders regarding matters
available for floor consideration. Many hold requests take the form of a letter addressed to the
majority or minority leader (depending on the party affiliation of the Senator placing the hold)
expressing reservations about the merits or timing of a particular policy proposal or nomination.
More often than not, Senate leadersas agents of their party responsible for defending the
political, policy, and procedural interests of their colleagueshonor a hold request because not
doing so could trigger a range of parliamentary responses from the holding Senator(s), such as a
filibuster, that could expend significant amounts of scarce floor time. Unless the target of a hold
is of considerable importance to the majority leader and a supermajority of his colleagues60 of
whom might be required to invoke cloture on legislation under Senate Rule XXIIthe most
practical course of action is often to lay the matter aside and attempt to promote negotiations that
could alleviate the concerns that gave rise to the hold. With hold-inspired negotiations underway,
the Senate can turn its attention to more broadly-supported matters.
Also from the CRS (https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/IN/IN12200) :
unanimous consent. The Senate can approve nominations using the cloture process in Senate Rule XXII.
The cloture process was designed to bring the Senate to a vote on a matter, even in the face of determined
opposition to having a vote. In recent years, the Senate has interpreted the cloture rule to require majority
support to end debate on a nomination, and also to establish that two hours is the maximum time for
debate on most nominations after cloture is agreed to.
Absent unanimous consent, the steps to confirm a nomination include:
The Senate approves a non-debatable motion to proceed to executive session to take up a
nomination on the Executive Calendar. (Normally this motion is approved immediately
without a roll call votebut with sufficient support, a Senator could secure a roll call
vote on this question. The motion requires a simple majority to pass.)
The majority leader (or his designee) files cloture on the nomination. (The cloture motion
asks if the Senate wishes to bring debate to a close on the nomination.) Absent unanimous
consent to alter this ripening period, the Senate must wait two session days before
voting on cloture. The Senate can conduct other business during these two days, and
usually does.
Two days of session later, the Senate votes on cloture. The vote is required to be a roll
call vote under the rule. If a majority of Senators voting support cloture, then cloture is
said to be invoked, and further consideration of the nomination is limited.
The Senate conducts post-cloture debate on the nomination. For all but the highestranking nominations, the maximum time for consideration of a nomination after cloture is
invoked is two hours. Once cloture is invoked on a matter, the Senate can consider other
business during the post-cloture period only by unanimous consent.
After post-cloture debate time expires, or when no Senator seeks to discuss the
nomination further, the Senate votes on the nomination. This can be by voice vote, but
with sufficient support a Senator could secure a roll call vote on the question of
confirming the nomination. The motion requires a simple majority to pass.
To make the confirmation vote final, and in order to immediately return the approved
nomination to the President, the Senate routinely takes another parliamentary step by
unanimous consent. To prevent the possibility of a re-vote on the nomination, the Senate
tables (meaning, adversely disposes of) a motion to reconsider (a motion that would
allow a re-vote). (Absent unanimous consent, the Senate could vote to table the motion to
reconsider.)
The Senate often confirms nominations without unanimous consent by using the cloture process just
described. Confirming a large number of nominations using the cloture process could take considerable
floor time. The process can be somewhat expedited by filing cloture on multiple nominations on the same
day (sometimes referred to as stacking cloture motions). Cloture motions filed sequentially on multiple
nominations ripen simultaneously after the next two days of Senate session. Each nomination must still be
considered separately, however, which would usually mean two roll call votes (one on cloture and one on
confirmation, each approximately 15 minutes) and then up to two hours of debate time on each
nomination.
maxsolomon
(35,742 posts)Tuberville used it to protest the Pentagon funding abortions. He blocked 450 Military promotions for 10 months.
https://www.npr.org/2023/12/19/1220492250/tuberville-drops-blockade-military-promotions
Dark n Stormy Knight
(10,152 posts)and pro-law enforcement.
🙄
Bernardo de La Paz
(52,394 posts)EarthFirst
(3,382 posts)mahina
(19,382 posts)Polybius
(19,105 posts)We had to wait a little for obvious reasons. #powderdry
Jose Garcia
(3,048 posts)mahina
(19,382 posts)PSPS
(14,292 posts)LOL "federal law" LOL
JMCKUSICK
(875 posts)and no unanimous consent on anything!
MLWR
(94 posts)on all nominees until LoneSkum is completely removed and his DOGE is disbanded.
bronxiteforever
(9,863 posts)
orleans
(35,574 posts)click on the links listed and it doesn't work (at least not for me)
https://www.usa.gov/agencies/u-s-agency-for-international-development
TBF
(35,000 posts)If they have a way to do it - why haven't they been doing it???
claudette
(4,984 posts)They have the numbers to pass them - they don't need Dems and it would send a message LOUD AND CLEAR - that Dems are NOT on the side of the orange felon.
Polybius
(19,105 posts)But I damn sure would have with Hegseth.
Polybius
(19,105 posts)Tuberville did it with military promotions. No other Republican did.
TBF
(35,000 posts)"it's how it's always been done".
I disagree and would hope you would rethink that approach. Biden had respectable candidates. Trump has a candidate who threw baby chicks in a blender to make food for his pet.
So, next when I say: "they really shouldn't be opening a concentration camp" - you're going to tell me something like: "well, this is how the Germans opened their concentration camp - looks ok to me". Same type of logic.
Polybius
(19,105 posts)I wasn't referring to Democrats who block.
TBF
(35,000 posts)If you are in favor of rubber-stamping these demented picks, then we still disagree. We should not agree to them simply because "they have the numbers" - we should still vote against to be on the record against every single one of these crazy candidates. There is no need to try to placate Trump. He hates democrats and is not going to give an inch on anything, no matter how "nice" we play. Surely you can see that.
Please also block everything until Elon Musk gets out of our government!
BattleRow
(1,366 posts)bluestarone
(18,715 posts)MUSK out of the White House and back to Africa.
LymphocyteLover
(7,258 posts)aggiesal
(9,734 posts)
























Hitorque
(254 posts)But it's a start and I'll take it!
DFW
(57,144 posts)See how you like it.
Jilly_in_VA
(11,492 posts)Come on, Dems! Everybody chime in!
RecoveringJournalist
(186 posts)It's about stinking time! I'm tired of Dems bringing pea shooters to a gunfight. Time for them to bring shotguns!
Scrivener7
(53,871 posts)claudette
(4,984 posts)travelingthrulife
(1,483 posts)So brave.
Hassler
(3,994 posts)Ignore Chuck the Schmuck and the Losermans and do what is actually possible to do.
Paladin
(29,337 posts)Immediately!
johnnyfins
(1,672 posts)Voting FOR TSFs nominees, and Klobuchar(who I think is a wonderful senator) is only interested in finding common ground.
liberalla
(10,240 posts)Thank you very much!
It's unthinkable what's going on.
Wicked Blue
(7,284 posts)which the media doesn't seem to be covering very much.
I posted my notes on the news conference in GD.
Native
(6,876 posts)Hekate
(96,050 posts)Javaman
(63,321 posts)will see, however, if it continues to grow or go back to it's gelatinous state.
Vinca
(51,557 posts)intheflow
(29,284 posts)It's not like he's only dismantling USAID, it's not only diplomatic positions that need to be blocked.
riversedge
(74,183 posts)jgmiller
(489 posts)I was just thinking this morning that a Dem Senator who is very safe like Schiff should pull a Tuberville until someone pulls in Musk to a hearing to find out exactly what is going on. This works well too but then once Schatz releases his hold someone else needs to do it to stop Musk.
quakerboy
(14,277 posts)Not just state department, but all trump appointees across the board, yes?
Wiz Imp
(3,501 posts)The nominees are all effectively going through the process as detailed below:
https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/IN/IN12200
for that action to occur. Such requests are usually made by the majority leader (or his designee), and the
Presiding Officer responds by inquiring if any Senator objects to the unanimous consent request. If no
Senator objects, then the nomination or nominations are approvedmore formally, the nominations are
said to be confirmed by the Senate. In practice, the majority leader does not ask unanimous consent to
confirm nominations without first communicating with the minority leader and all other Senators to
determine if any Senator would object. If the majority leader learns any Senator would object, he usually
does not ask unanimous consent on the floor and may try to address the concerns of the Senator. If a
consent request has not been cleared in advance, a Senator opposed to the request must formally object on
the floor to block the action.
Note, this has not happened on any nominee, even Rubio who was confirmed unanimously anyway.
unanimous consent. The Senate can approve nominations using the cloture process in Senate Rule XXII.
The cloture process was designed to bring the Senate to a vote on a matter, even in the face of determined
opposition to having a vote. In recent years, the Senate has interpreted the cloture rule to require majority
support to end debate on a nomination, and also to establish that two hours is the maximum time for
debate on most nominations after cloture is agreed to.
Absent unanimous consent, the steps to confirm a nomination include:
The Senate approves a non-debatable motion to proceed to executive session to take up a
nomination on the Executive Calendar. (Normally this motion is approved immediately
without a roll call votebut with sufficient support, a Senator could secure a roll call
vote on this question. The motion requires a simple majority to pass.)
The majority leader (or his designee) files cloture on the nomination. (The cloture motion
asks if the Senate wishes to bring debate to a close on the nomination.) Absent unanimous
consent to alter this ripening period, the Senate must wait two session days before
voting on cloture. The Senate can conduct other business during these two days, and
usually does.
Two days of session later, the Senate votes on cloture. The vote is required to be a roll
call vote under the rule. If a majority of Senators voting support cloture, then cloture is
said to be invoked, and further consideration of the nomination is limited.
The Senate conducts post-cloture debate on the nomination. For all but the highest ranking nominations, the maximum time for consideration of a nomination after cloture is
invoked is two hours. Once cloture is invoked on a matter, the Senate can consider other
business during the post-cloture period only by unanimous consent.
After post-cloture debate time expires, or when no Senator seeks to discuss the
nomination further, the Senate votes on the nomination. This can be by voice vote, but
with sufficient support a Senator could secure a roll call vote on the question of
confirming the nomination. The motion requires a simple majority to pass.
To make the confirmation vote final, and in order to immediately return the approved
nomination to the President, the Senate routinely takes another parliamentary step by
unanimous consent. To prevent the possibility of a re-vote on the nomination, the Senate
tables (meaning, adversely disposes of) a motion to reconsider (a motion that would
allow a re-vote). (Absent unanimous consent, the Senate could vote to table the motion to
reconsider.)
The Senate often confirms nominations without unanimous consent by using the cloture process just
described. Confirming a large number of nominations using the cloture process could take considerable
floor time. The process can be somewhat expedited by filing cloture on multiple nominations on the same
day (sometimes referred to as stacking cloture motions). Cloture motions filed sequentially on multiple
nominations ripen simultaneously after the next two days of Senate session. Each nomination must still be
considered separately, however, which would usually mean two roll call votes (one on cloture and one on
confirmation, each approximately 15 minutes) and then up to two hours of debate time on each
nomination.
Littlered
(116 posts)Unless Im missing something (quite possible), this isnt anything they arent already doing.
TBF
(35,000 posts)HereForTheParty
(590 posts)
proud patriot
(101,485 posts)
calimary
(85,143 posts)Because YOUR TAXES pay their salaries and benefits.
And YOUR VOTES got them into those big important and influential jobs.
They take the taxpayers (also known as US) for granted. THAT has to STOP!!!
COL Mustard
(7,175 posts)Until this thing gets resolved.
Bluetus
(567 posts)That's how we get the media into the game. If it is just one Senator, they can minimize that, as they do with Rand Paul, as a crackpot. We need EVERY Dem Senator on the team now. This is really, literally, the very least they can do. It is their right. it is their job.
But the blanket holds should not just be for USAID. Senators should demand full accountability of Musk and that every one of the illegal EOs be rescinded before any further action takes place on cabinet nominees.
No small demands. Do what the Republicans would do if they were in this position.
Historic NY
(38,407 posts)
Dem4life1970
(688 posts)...if the Stupidest Senator in the U.S. Senate (Tommy Tuberville) can do this for no good reason, then maybe, just maybe principled Democrats can stand up for our 245 year old democracy.
The Senate should block all Trump nominees. All are unqualified and have the intent to dismantle the "administrative state" aka the U.S. Government.
Wiz Imp
(3,501 posts)Republicans can easily overcome any Democratic attempts to block any nominee with a simple majority vote. The only way to block cabinet nominees is to get 4 Republicans to vote against confirmation. So far, no Republican has voted against a single nominee except Hegseth.
Process outlined below. From a CRS Report on holds (https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/R/R43563) :
request is proposed on the floor, any Senator may object to it. If objection is heard, the consent
request does not take effect. Efforts to modify the original request may be undertakena process
that can require extensive negotiations between and among Senate leaders and their colleagues
but there is no guarantee that a particular objection can be addressed to the satisfaction of all
Senators
The Senate hold emerges from within this context of unanimous-consent decision-making as a
method of transmitting policy or scheduling preferences to Senate leaders regarding matters
available for floor consideration. Many hold requests take the form of a letter addressed to the
majority or minority leader (depending on the party affiliation of the Senator placing the hold)
expressing reservations about the merits or timing of a particular policy proposal or nomination.
More often than not, Senate leadersas agents of their party responsible for defending the
political, policy, and procedural interests of their colleagueshonor a hold request because not
doing so could trigger a range of parliamentary responses from the holding Senator(s), such as a
filibuster, that could expend significant amounts of scarce floor time. Unless the target of a hold
is of considerable importance to the majority leader and a supermajority of his colleagues60 of
whom might be required to invoke cloture on legislation under Senate Rule XXIIthe most
practical course of action is often to lay the matter aside and attempt to promote negotiations that
could alleviate the concerns that gave rise to the hold. With hold-inspired negotiations underway,
the Senate can turn its attention to more broadly-supported matters.
Also from the CRS (https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/IN/IN12200) :
unanimous consent. The Senate can approve nominations using the cloture process in Senate Rule XXII.
The cloture process was designed to bring the Senate to a vote on a matter, even in the face of determined
opposition to having a vote. In recent years, the Senate has interpreted the cloture rule to require majority
support to end debate on a nomination, and also to establish that two hours is the maximum time for
debate on most nominations after cloture is agreed to.
Absent unanimous consent, the steps to confirm a nomination include:
The Senate approves a non-debatable motion to proceed to executive session to take up a
nomination on the Executive Calendar. (Normally this motion is approved immediately
without a roll call votebut with sufficient support, a Senator could secure a roll call
vote on this question. The motion requires a simple majority to pass.)
The majority leader (or his designee) files cloture on the nomination. (The cloture motion
asks if the Senate wishes to bring debate to a close on the nomination.) Absent unanimous
consent to alter this ripening period, the Senate must wait two session days before
voting on cloture. The Senate can conduct other business during these two days, and
usually does.
Two days of session later, the Senate votes on cloture. The vote is required to be a roll
call vote under the rule. If a majority of Senators voting support cloture, then cloture is
said to be invoked, and further consideration of the nomination is limited.
The Senate conducts post-cloture debate on the nomination. For all but the highestranking nominations, the maximum time for consideration of a nomination after cloture is
invoked is two hours. Once cloture is invoked on a matter, the Senate can consider other
business during the post-cloture period only by unanimous consent.
After post-cloture debate time expires, or when no Senator seeks to discuss the
nomination further, the Senate votes on the nomination. This can be by voice vote, but
with sufficient support a Senator could secure a roll call vote on the question of
confirming the nomination. The motion requires a simple majority to pass.
To make the confirmation vote final, and in order to immediately return the approved
nomination to the President, the Senate routinely takes another parliamentary step by
unanimous consent. To prevent the possibility of a re-vote on the nomination, the Senate
tables (meaning, adversely disposes of) a motion to reconsider (a motion that would
allow a re-vote). (Absent unanimous consent, the Senate could vote to table the motion to
reconsider.)
The Senate often confirms nominations without unanimous consent by using the cloture process just
described. Confirming a large number of nominations using the cloture process could take considerable
floor time. The process can be somewhat expedited by filing cloture on multiple nominations on the same
day (sometimes referred to as stacking cloture motions). Cloture motions filed sequentially on multiple
nominations ripen simultaneously after the next two days of Senate session. Each nomination must still be
considered separately, however, which would usually mean two roll call votes (one on cloture and one on
confirmation, each approximately 15 minutes) and then up to two hours of debate time on each
nomination.
JimRiggins
(15 posts)One in a row of democrats doing something to thwart the orange god king.
Sober Retiree
(14 posts)Courage under fire. Thank You
AdamGG
(1,591 posts)Undergone an FBI background check? Do they have security clearances?
What legal clearance do they have to do this? Do "DOGE staffers" have any more legal authority to do this than Proud Boys or Oath Keepers?
BlueMTexpat
(15,521 posts)them before, why not?
They are uniformly unqualified stooges.
Dem4life1234
(2,407 posts)More need to obstruct.
Because those Rethuglicans sure love obstructing things that actually help everyday Americans.
If there is anything to obstruct, it's this destruction of America.
I hate this time period.
jmowreader
(51,824 posts)DOGE needs to be disbanded and Elon Musk removed from the government - and Musks servers purged of government data.
TBF
(35,000 posts)We didn't vote for him and he does not have any official congressional oversight. This is all BS and he needs to be removed.