More Politically INCORRECT Cartoons for Monday October 23, 2017
Posts tagged ‘Senator Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.)’
Commentary: The People Have Spoken. Trump’s Supreme Court Nominee Deserves a Vote.
Commentary by Sen. Mitch McConnell 
/ @SenateMajLdr / January 30, 2017
URL of the original posting site: http://dailysignal.com/2017/01/30/the-people-have-spoken-trumps-supreme-court-nominee-deserves-a-vote/
Mitch McConnell on President Trump’s pending Supreme Court nominee: “I consistently maintained that the next president would fill this vacancy. I held to that view even when nearly everyone thought the president would be Hillary Clinton.” (Photo: Olivier Douliery/UPI/Newscom)
Justice Antonin Scalia was a towering figure on the Supreme Court. His unfortunate passing last year was not only a great loss to our country, but it came, as we all know, as our country was already in the midst of a contentious presidential election process.
Mitch McConnell Did Something Last Night to Senate Dems That Has Them Furious
Posted by Pete Kasperowicz, January 23, 2015
URL of the Original Posting Site: http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2015/01/23/mitch-mcconnell-did-something-last-night-to-senate-dems-that-has-them-furious/
Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) late Thursday left Democrats angry and sputtering on the Senate floor, as he used his new power as majority leader to brush off several Democratic amendments in an effort to speed up work on a bill to approve the Keystone pipeline. McConnell has so far made a point of allowing amendment votes, something Democrats barely allowed for the last few years. Earlier Thursday, McConnell boasted that the Senate had already held more amendment votes on the Keystone bill than Democrats allowed during all of 2014.
“We’ve actually reached a milestone here that I think’s noteworthy for the Senate,” McConnell said after the 15th amendment vote. “This is the way the Senate ought to work.”
But McConnell has also said the Senate can’t work on the Keystone bill forever, a warning that he wants to finish it up at some point in the near future.
Late Thursday night, McConnell said the new open process in the Senate led members of both parties to propose a new wave of amendments that he wanted to deal with immediately. He asked senators for an agreement to vote on a series of 12 amendments right then and there. Senate Minority Whip Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) objected, and said Democrats would be ready to keep working on these amendments on Friday. But McConnell dismissed that and said the Senate should be ready to work on them now. With no agreement, he said his only choice was to start a series of votes to table, or kill, all Democratic amendments.
“Given the fact that they’re reluctant to vote on their own amendments… the only way to go forward is to table their amendments,” he said.
As Democrats protested, McConnell moved to table the first amendment, from Sen. Ed Markey (D-Mass.). Markey asked several times to have one minute to speak on his amendment — “Mr. President! Mr. President!” he yelled in an effort to stop the process — but McConnell objected, and the Senate voted to kill his amendment.
The same thing happened for other Democratic amendments from Sens. Tom Carper (Del.), Pat Leahy (Vt.), Jack Reed (R.I.) and Sheldon Whitehouse (R.I.).
The process led to some sharp debate on Twitter, as Democrats argued that McConnell’s tactics showed he wasn’t serious about an open amendment process. Sen. Clarie McCaskill (D-Mo.) complained that McConnell was only interested in killing Democratic amendments, and wasn’t giving Democrats even one minute to speak about their proposals.
Adam Jentleson, spokesman for Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.), tweeted, “So much for open debate. McConnell just denied Markey chance to speak.”
But Dan Holler of Heritage Action, shot back, “How many amendments did Markey have voted on last year?”
Earlier in the debate, Durbin asked why the Senate couldn’t come back into session on Friday morning and handle all the amendments. McConnell has said the Senate would work Fridays, but later adjourned the Senate until Monday, further angering Democrats.
Senate Democrats accused McConnell of breaking his promise to work on Fridays so that Senate Republicans could attend a Friday meeting in California hosted by Charles and David Koch, big contributors to the Republican Party.
What Did You Say? 
In keeping with the Biden Rule, which states that “ … action on a Supreme Court nomination must be put off until after the election campaign is over, ” I have stood firm on the principle that the American people should have a voice in the selection of their next Supreme Court justice. I consistently maintained that the next president would fill this vacancy. I held to that view even when nearly everyone thought the president would be Hillary Clinton.
Our friends on the left may lack the same consistency on this topic—the principle we’ve followed, after all, is not only known as the Biden Rule but also the Schumer Standard—but there is one thing from which we can expect the left not to waver: trying to paint whomever is actually nominated in apocalyptic terms.
Doesn’t matter who this Republican president nominates. Doesn’t matter who any Republican president nominates—really. The left has been rolling out the same, tired playbook for decades.
I’m serious—that’s what they said about Stevens. And Souter. And Kennedy.
We can expect to hear a lot of end times rhetoric from the left again today. In fact, we already have. The same groups on the left who always seem to say the sky is falling when a Republican president puts forward a Supreme Court nominee are saying it’s falling again. Only this time, they’re saying it before we even have a nominee.
President Donald Trump has a list of about 20 Americans who he is considering nominating to the Supreme Court. These men and women have different professional backgrounds and different life experiences. Some have distinguished themselves in state courts, others have distinguished themselves in federal court. Some are appellate court judges, others are trial court judges. Some passed the Senate without a single negative vote against their nomination. Others passed the Senate without requiring a roll call vote at all on their nomination.
The bipartisan support, the years of judicial experience, the impressive credentials—none of these appear to matter to some on the left. They say things like, “We are prepared to oppose every name on the list.” That’s right, Mr. President. Every single name on the list.
Even more troubling, some Senate Democrats are saying the same thing. My friend from New York said it was hard for him “to imagine a nominee” from Trump whom Senate Democrats “could support.” We don’t even have one yet.
I hope we can all skip past that and get down to our serious work. The election is now behind us. The president has been working to make his decision on a nominee, and we expect him to announce that decision tomorrow (UPDATE: Tonight).
The Senate should respect the result of the election and treat this newly elected president’s nominee in the same way the nominees of other newly elected presidents have been treated—and that is with careful consideration followed by an up-or-down vote.
We had two nominations in the first term of President Bill Clinton. Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Stephen Breyer both got up-or-down votes. There was no filibuster. We had two nominations in the first term of President Barack Obama: Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan. No filibuster. First-term presidents have received up-or-down votes.
We have every right to expect the same courtesy from today’s minority when we receive this nomination.