Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Native

(6,876 posts)
Mon Feb 3, 2025, 12:18 PM Feb 3

Democratic Senator Says He Will Block Trump Nominees Until USAID Is Back

Source: WSJ via MSN

WASHINGTON—Sen. Brian Schatz (D., Hawaii) said he would place a “blanket hold” on all of President Trump’s State Department nominees until his administration’s attack on the leading foreign-assistance agency ends, a move that threatens to stall Trump’s ability to get his foreign-policy team in place.

Schatz’s threat came as Elon Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency aims to close the U.S. Agency for International Development; the agency’s existence as an independent government organization is codified in federal law. Over the weekend, DOGE staffers forced their way into USAID’s 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 Trump’s diplomatic confirmations until USAID is again allowed to operate normally and the administration ceases its “authoritarian behavior.” Such a hold would halt the chamber’s ability to move bills quickly, and require Senate Majority Leader John Thune to use precious floor time to ram the president’s 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

81 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Democratic Senator Says He Will Block Trump Nominees Until USAID Is Back (Original Post) Native Feb 3 OP
the spine may stiffen. WhiteTara Feb 3 #1
At last RockCreek Feb 3 #2
Thank you, Senator Schatz orangecrush Feb 3 #3
Good for him! people Feb 3 #4
Balances are written in to the Constitution and legislator's rules. Time to start using them. mpcamb Feb 3 #35
I would like to see Linda ladeewolf Feb 3 #41
More of this please. Ray Bruns Feb 3 #5
And when he does mouth off post the Tuberville video. In all this chaos I need a laugh Bengus81 Feb 3 #48
Oh thank the universe LearnedHand Feb 3 #6
How does a Democrat have a deciding vote? Baitball Blogger Feb 3 #7
One Senator can place a "hold." Tuberville did it to military spooky3 Feb 3 #13
What the hell! Are you telling me we can bring Congress to a halt? Baitball Blogger Feb 3 #19
The relevant committee, at least. Aristus Feb 3 #40
Thank you. Baitball Blogger Feb 3 #42
No it doesn't work like that. A hold means a refusal to agree to unanimous consent. Wiz Imp Feb 3 #47
It's a "hold". maxsolomon Feb 3 #15
Cuz Rs are pro-military... Dark n Stormy Knight Feb 4 #71
Good. . . . nt Bernardo de La Paz Feb 3 #8
If this is a viable option...why couldn't this have been utilized all along? EarthFirst Feb 3 #9
Death threats to entire families mahina Feb 3 #11
Because Republicans will retaliate with the next President's nominees Polybius Feb 3 #64
The nominations are actually blocked, just slowed down Jose Garcia Feb 4 #75
Thank you Brian. Thank you Native. mahina Feb 3 #10
Excellent! mcar Feb 3 #12
LOL. "the agency's existence as an independent government organization is codified in federal law" PSPS Feb 3 #14
Place a hold on ALL NOMINEES JMCKUSICK Feb 3 #16
Someone needs to place a "hold" MLWR Feb 3 #17
Thank you Senator! bronxiteforever Feb 3 #18
i just googled USAID and the gov pages are down orleans Feb 3 #20
Why don't they just block ALL nominees, period. TBF Feb 3 #21
That's my question too claudette Feb 3 #31
I wouldn't support using it with every nominee Polybius Feb 3 #66
Because even insane Republicans didn't do it to Biden's initial nominees Polybius Feb 3 #65
Suggesting that it is insane to block horrible candidates just because TBF Feb 4 #76
No, by using "insane" I was referring to most extreme Republicans in the Senate Polybius Feb 4 #79
You're avoiding the subject - do you agree with blocking nominations? TBF Thursday #80
Great! hannah Feb 3 #22
Muskollini... BattleRow Feb 3 #33
Not anti immigrant here but i say (this one instance) bluestarone Feb 3 #37
YES!!!! LymphocyteLover Feb 3 #23
I have only 1 thing to say about this .... aggiesal Feb 3 #24
We should have been blocking EVERYTHING before now Hitorque Feb 3 #25
Trump? You have been Tubervilled! DFW Feb 3 #26
I hope he's not the only one! Jilly_in_VA Feb 3 #27
About Time RecoveringJournalist Feb 3 #28
All of them need to say this! Scrivener7 Feb 3 #29
That's what they all should do! claudette Feb 3 #30
You should be blocking them because they are unfit. travelingthrulife Feb 3 #32
Schatz and my senator, Wyden get it. Hassler Feb 3 #34
Now that's the sort of action ALL DEMOCRATIC POLITICIANS should take! Paladin Feb 3 #36
Too bad Fetterman is too busy actually johnnyfins Feb 3 #55
And that's how you do it! Thank you Senator Schatz!! liberalla Feb 3 #38
good. barbtries Feb 3 #39
He was part of the news conference by Democratic Congress members at USAID Wicked Blue Feb 3 #43
wasn't it great to also hear from some of the newer MOCs? Native Feb 3 #46
🌺 Mahalo nui loa, Senator Schatz 🌺 Hekate Feb 3 #44
wow, the Dems felt their backs and discovered, much to their surprise, they actually do have a spine. Javaman Feb 3 #45
Finally. A glimpse of hope. Vinca Feb 3 #49
How about blocking ALL his nominees? intheflow Feb 3 #50
ALL of the Dem Senators should have cheered him on LOUDLY IMHO riversedge Feb 3 #51
Finally someone was paying attention! jgmiller Feb 3 #52
and all other appointments, right? quakerboy Feb 3 #53
To Be clear, Democrats have not agreed to unanimous consent on any cabinet nominee. Wiz Imp Feb 3 #54
I was just about to post this. Littlered Feb 4 #73
Semantics - the result at the end of the day is the same. nt TBF Feb 4 #77
THAT'S what I'm talking about!! HereForTheParty Feb 3 #56
Keep calling your reps proud patriot Feb 3 #57
Yep. Nag 'em. Remind them THEY work for YOU! calimary Feb 3 #61
Every Senator should be placing a hold on every single nominee COL Mustard Feb 3 #58
Excellent news. ANd the goal should be to get 100% of the Dem Senators to join in that. Bluetus Feb 3 #59
Thank you Senator, Historic NY Feb 3 #60
More of this please... Dem4life1970 Feb 3 #62
Not enough. ERW Feb 3 #63
It is not possible for Democrats to block all nominees Wiz Imp Feb 4 #78
One in a row JimRiggins Feb 4 #67
Stand Tall Sober Retiree Feb 4 #68
Have the 'DOGE staffers' who are seizing classified information AdamGG Feb 4 #69
If he hasn't been blocking BlueMTexpat Feb 4 #70
Yes please! Dem4life1234 Feb 4 #72
It needs to go farther jmowreader Feb 4 #74
And after that - charge him in court. TBF Thursday #81

people

(740 posts)
4. Good for him!
Mon Feb 3, 2025, 12:21 PM
Feb 3

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???

Linda ladeewolf

(633 posts)
41. I would like to see
Mon Feb 3, 2025, 02:46 PM
Feb 3

Them call in some law enforcement on musk. Something! Get a court order to stop him, anything would be nice!

Wiz Imp

(3,501 posts)
47. No it doesn't work like that. A hold means a refusal to agree to unanimous consent.
Mon Feb 3, 2025, 02:55 PM
Feb 3

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) :

When a unanimous consent
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 undertaken—a 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 leaders—as agents of their party responsible for defending the
political, policy, and procedural interests of their colleagues—honor 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 colleagues—60 of
whom might be required to invoke cloture on legislation under Senate Rule XXII—the 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) :

In response to a hold, the Senate could choose to pursue consideration of a single nomination without
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 vote—but 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.

Polybius

(19,105 posts)
64. Because Republicans will retaliate with the next President's nominees
Mon Feb 3, 2025, 09:27 PM
Feb 3

We had to wait a little for obvious reasons. #powderdry

PSPS

(14,292 posts)
14. LOL. "the agency's existence as an independent government organization is codified in federal law"
Mon Feb 3, 2025, 01:00 PM
Feb 3

LOL "federal law" LOL

claudette

(4,984 posts)
31. That's my question too
Mon Feb 3, 2025, 02:18 PM
Feb 3

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)
65. Because even insane Republicans didn't do it to Biden's initial nominees
Mon Feb 3, 2025, 09:29 PM
Feb 3

Tuberville did it with military promotions. No other Republican did.

TBF

(35,000 posts)
76. Suggesting that it is insane to block horrible candidates just because
Tue Feb 4, 2025, 12:58 PM
Feb 4

"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)
79. No, by using "insane" I was referring to most extreme Republicans in the Senate
Tue Feb 4, 2025, 01:23 PM
Feb 4

I wasn't referring to Democrats who block.

TBF

(35,000 posts)
80. You're avoiding the subject - do you agree with blocking nominations?
Thu Feb 6, 2025, 11:55 AM
Thursday

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.

Hassler

(3,994 posts)
34. Schatz and my senator, Wyden get it.
Mon Feb 3, 2025, 02:27 PM
Feb 3

Ignore Chuck the Schmuck and the Losermans and do what is actually possible to do.

johnnyfins

(1,672 posts)
55. Too bad Fetterman is too busy actually
Mon Feb 3, 2025, 05:09 PM
Feb 3

Voting FOR TSFs nominees, and Klobuchar(who I think is a wonderful senator) is only interested in finding common ground.

Wicked Blue

(7,284 posts)
43. He was part of the news conference by Democratic Congress members at USAID
Mon Feb 3, 2025, 02:49 PM
Feb 3

which the media doesn't seem to be covering very much.

I posted my notes on the news conference in GD.

Javaman

(63,321 posts)
45. wow, the Dems felt their backs and discovered, much to their surprise, they actually do have a spine.
Mon Feb 3, 2025, 02:53 PM
Feb 3

will see, however, if it continues to grow or go back to it's gelatinous state.

intheflow

(29,284 posts)
50. How about blocking ALL his nominees?
Mon Feb 3, 2025, 03:07 PM
Feb 3

It's not like he's only dismantling USAID, it's not only diplomatic positions that need to be blocked.

jgmiller

(489 posts)
52. Finally someone was paying attention!
Mon Feb 3, 2025, 03:29 PM
Feb 3

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.

Wiz Imp

(3,501 posts)
54. To Be clear, Democrats have not agreed to unanimous consent on any cabinet nominee.
Mon Feb 3, 2025, 03:47 PM
Feb 3

The nominees are all effectively going through the process as detailed below:

https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/IN/IN12200

Approving a nomination by unanimous consent requires that a Senator ask, during a session of the Senate,
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 approved—more 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.

In response to a hold, the Senate could choose to pursue consideration of a single nomination without
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 vote—but 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)
73. I was just about to post this.
Tue Feb 4, 2025, 09:48 AM
Feb 4

Unless I’m missing something (quite possible), this isn’t anything they aren’t already doing.

calimary

(85,143 posts)
61. Yep. Nag 'em. Remind them THEY work for YOU!
Mon Feb 3, 2025, 06:43 PM
Feb 3

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!!!

Bluetus

(567 posts)
59. Excellent news. ANd the goal should be to get 100% of the Dem Senators to join in that.
Mon Feb 3, 2025, 05:53 PM
Feb 3

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.

Dem4life1970

(688 posts)
62. More of this please...
Mon Feb 3, 2025, 07:00 PM
Feb 3

...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.

ERW

(4 posts)
63. Not enough.
Mon Feb 3, 2025, 08:02 PM
Feb 3

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)
78. It is not possible for Democrats to block all nominees
Tue Feb 4, 2025, 01:16 PM
Feb 4

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) :


When a unanimous consent
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 undertaken—a 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 leaders—as agents of their party responsible for defending the
political, policy, and procedural interests of their colleagues—honor 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 colleagues—60 of
whom might be required to invoke cloture on legislation under Senate Rule XXII—the 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) :

In response to a hold, the Senate could choose to pursue consideration of a single nomination without
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 vote—but 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.

AdamGG

(1,591 posts)
69. Have the 'DOGE staffers' who are seizing classified information
Tue Feb 4, 2025, 12:57 AM
Feb 4

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?

Dem4life1234

(2,407 posts)
72. Yes please!
Tue Feb 4, 2025, 09:35 AM
Feb 4

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)
74. It needs to go farther
Tue Feb 4, 2025, 10:07 AM
Feb 4

DOGE needs to be disbanded and Elon Musk removed from the government - and Musk’s servers purged of government data.

TBF

(35,000 posts)
81. And after that - charge him in court.
Thu Feb 6, 2025, 11:57 AM
Thursday

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.

Latest Discussions»Latest Breaking News»Democratic Senator Says H...