373
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 02 Nov 2023
373 points (98.4% liked)
politics
19144 readers
1190 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
If they could just DO it, in spite of Tuberville, why haven't they until jusy now? What changed? The article doesn't mention.
It I recall correctly, they can still do it but it's one at a time. They can't do who large batches like normal and there is a huge backlog. They have been doing a few here and there to critical positions.
Not that Tuberville isn't a POS but if it's critical to get these folks confirmed and you have a way to do it, get to fucking work. I'm tired of hearing that their hands are tied when they just need to roll up their sleeves.
400 nominations would literally take every minute of every day the Senate's in session for the next 6 months. Absolutely nothing else would happen in the Senate between now and then. And despite the normal blathering about how ineffectual the Senate is, they do a lot of shit behind the scenes.
I'm not expecting them to do all 400 that way, just the ones I keep being told are critical.
That's quite literally what this article is about.
Great, why'd it take so long?
You know how I can tell you're just arguing to hear yourself argue?
They kept taking suggestions from random assholes on the internet who just want to hear themselves complain, clearly.
Because that's not the whole story.
Yes, they can (and have) done a few individually.
The reason they've resisted doing that for the most part is two-fold:
They don't want to normalize what Tuberville is doing. If they "give-in" and start considering promotions individually, then they signal that any senator can use this as a tool.
They think that what Tuberville is doing is ultimately harmful to Republicans and will help Democrats win more seats in the next election. They will run ads saying that Tuberville and his fellow Republicans are hurting American military members and weakening our military readiness.
This sounds like two wins
The line that divides you and the fuckers in Alabama is smaller than you think.
You sound like someone who's glad when the government shuts down.
... were you going to add any information to the conversation or are you being ironic?
I'll attempt to explain. They are currently backed up 300+ promotions. In order to do one at a time, Schmumer has to file cloture for each one to bring them to the floor. When the matter gets to the floor, there's a minimum one hour debate time. Let's call floor time an hour and a hal per promotion. That brings the total of Senate floor time to 450 hours. While that's happening, more promotions are being submitted.
It required changes to senate rules. Chuck Schumer opposed changing the rules because it would likely be a permanent change and allow either party to ram votes through, instead of working towards consensus like most things in Senate. This could lead to Republicans ramming extreme stuff through senate when they eventually take over in the future.
So, he finally just gave up and changed the rules?
No, the rules have always allowed them to consider promotions individually. It's voting on promos as a bloc that requires unanimous consent.
I would also like to know this.