AWOL Judd Joins Filibuster Against Stimulus Bill

3/5ths of 99? (0.00 / 0)

Senate Rule XXII, however, known as the "cloture rule," enables Senators to end a filibuster on any debatable matter the Senate is considering. Sixteen Senators initiate this process by presenting a motion to end the debate. The Senate does not vote on this cloture motion until the second day after the motion is made. Then it usually requires the votes of at least three-fifths of all Senators (normally 60 votes)to invoke cloture. Invoking cloture on a proposal to amend the Senate's standing rules requires the support of two-thirds of the Senators present and voting.

If Gregg is recusing himself, is he "present and voting?"

3/5ths of 99 is 59.4. Do we round down?

The giant checks its pockets.

Regrets? None!  

---

by: Jack Mitchell @ Wed Feb 04, 2009 at 12:12:27 PM CST

Senate (0.00 / 0)

If Gregg is recusing himself, there are only 98 Senators who can vote.

Franken has not been sworn in yet.


-President, College Democrats of New Hampshire

---

by: sdoyle @ Wed Feb 04, 2009 at 12:19:53 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Ted Kennedy calls in sick (0.00 / 0)

Is it 60 votes or 3/5ths of "present and voting?"

Is our President a putz or not? And speak up when you answer. I can barely hear over all the carping.

The giant checks its pockets.

Regrets? None!  

---

by: Jack Mitchell @ Wed Feb 04, 2009 at 12:23:42 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Not a putz (4.00 / 2)

But this appointment has been one long fezzle, from beginning to end.

---

by: elwood @ Wed Feb 04, 2009 at 12:42:16 PM CST

[ Parent ]

A 4 rating for a Bert &I reference (4.00 / 1)

as well as complete agreement.

---

by: GreyMike @ Wed Feb 04, 2009 at 15:44:10 PM CST

[ Parent ]

I thought that might have just gone by everyone (4.00 / 1)

in the manner that the Bangor Packet did not.

---

by: elwood @ Wed Feb 04, 2009 at 15:47:45 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Not everyone. (4.00 / 1)

For example, I figure Blagojevich met the same fate as Virgil Bliss: the dirt just drug him down.

---

by: GreyMike @ Wed Feb 04, 2009 at 15:55:10 PM CST

[ Parent ]

It doesn't matter who is present - Gregg has to resign (0.00 / 0)

"Invoking cloture usually requires a three-fifths vote of the entire Senate - "three-fifths of the Senators duly chosen and sworn." If there are no vacancies, therefore, 60 Senators must vote to invoke cloture."

Franken's seat is vacant. That's 3/5ths of 99. If Powerball Judd resigns it would be 3/5ths of 98. But if he simply doesn't show it's 99.

---

by: Mike Caulfield @ Wed Feb 04, 2009 at 13:30:19 PM CST

[ Parent ]

3/5th of 98 is 58.8 (0.00 / 0)

rounded up to 59. So that would change the number.

---

by: elwood @ Wed Feb 04, 2009 at 13:32:51 PM CST

[ Parent ]

We should make this very clear. (4.00 / 1)

Judd's refusal to resign changes the equation.

There is nothing special about the stimulus bill other than it would tarnish Judd's winger credentials. If voting on stimulus is a conflict of interest, any vote is.

New Hampshire deserves to be represented on the most important economic legislation in a decade.

Demand Judd vote.

---

by: Mike Caulfield @ Wed Feb 04, 2009 at 14:33:18 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Disagree. (0.00 / 0)

It's a conflict of interest for him to vote because he's accepted a nomination to serve as a subordinate to the President, but it's perfectly reasonable for him not to resign until he's been confirmed.

Secretaries Clinton and Salazar didn't resign until they were confirmed.

It's an unfortunate circumstance, but I don't think there's a more reasonable course of action than the one he's taking.  He should, of course, be lobbying his [former] colleagues to support the President's bill, now that he's one of the administration's key economic people, pending confirmation.

---

by: Douglas E. Lindner @ Wed Feb 04, 2009 at 17:04:53 PM CST

[ Parent ]

I don't understand that post at all. (4.00 / 1)

Clinton and Salazar didn't recuse themselves either.

And he should lobby but not vote? And still claim that he is working for New Hampshire, not Obama?

---

by: elwood @ Wed Feb 04, 2009 at 17:14:42 PM CST

[ Parent ]

It's messy. (0.00 / 0)

And I'm not saying Clinton and Salazar recused themselves; I'm saying it makes sense for Gregg to, particularly because though his new boss supports the bill, Senator Gregg probably wouldn't have.

As for your other point, I think it's clear he is working for the President now, which is why he shouldn't vote.  On the other hand, I think it's reasonable for him not to give up his Senate seat for a Cabinet post until it's certain he has a Cabinet post.

It's messy.  It's very messy.

---

by: Douglas E. Lindner @ Wed Feb 04, 2009 at 17:23:00 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Clinton and Salazar (4.00 / 1)

were still able to do their jobs, representing the people who voted for them.

Gregg believes he cannot do his job.

Quit. Simple.

---

by: elwood @ Wed Feb 04, 2009 at 17:29:52 PM CST

[ Parent ]

My understanding: (4.00 / 2)

1. Cloture requires 60% of ALL Senators, not Senators who are present.

2. They "round up": if 60% comes out to 59.4, they need 60. I don't have source for that, just my (sometimes faulty) recall of previous discussions.

---

by: elwood @ Wed Feb 04, 2009 at 12:41:36 PM CST

Mine too (4.00 / 1)

My understanding is that the operative interpretation of the rules is that the 'aye' votes must achieve the three-fifths threshold. If they require 59.4 votes to achieve cloture, then any number less than 59.4 fails, including 59.

IT for John Lynch '04 and NHDP '08 - I'm liking my track record so far!

---

by: RealNRH @ Wed Feb 04, 2009 at 13:25:22 PM CST

[ Parent ]

I'm sure Arlen Specter (4.00 / 1)

would love to cast .35 of a vote on a controversial issue...

---

by: elwood @ Wed Feb 04, 2009 at 13:38:47 PM CST

[ Parent ]

They do round up. (0.00 / 0)

That's why it takes 67 Senators to constitute the two thirds in a veto override.

---

by: Douglas E. Lindner @ Wed Feb 04, 2009 at 17:05:55 PM CST

[ Parent ]

We should have been clearer (0.00 / 0)

66.667 would round up under most schemes.

Senate rules seem to also round up 59.01 to 60.

---

by: elwood @ Wed Feb 04, 2009 at 17:19:53 PM CST

[ Parent ]

I think it's a threshold of "at least x". (4.00 / 2)

Using your example, 59 votes does not meet the threshold of "at least 59.01 votes", and there is no fractional voting, so effectively, the number is 60.

---

by: Douglas E. Lindner @ Wed Feb 04, 2009 at 17:25:46 PM CST

[ Parent ]

right (4.00 / 3)

if it a motion require 3.x to pass and you only have 3 the motion fails as you did not make the threshold, there is no rounding down.

Hope > Fear



Create a free Blue Hampshire account and join the conversation.

---

by: Mike Hoefer @ Wed Feb 04, 2009 at 18:06:50 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Cloture (4.00 / 3)

According to the Congressional Research Service,

The majority required to invoke cloture is three-fifths of the Senators duly chosen
and sworn, or 60 votes if there are no vacancies in the Senate's membership.
However, invoking cloture on a measure or motion to amend the Senate's rules
requires the votes of two-thirds of the Senators present and voting, or 67 votes if
all 100 Senators vote.

So a senator who votes present or is not in attendance due to illness or whatever counts as a "no" vote on cloture. The second option - you could try to amend the rules to change the cloture procedure - requires two-thirds of those present and voting, so you'd need a dozen absent senators to knock the total below 60.

And the odds of keeping everyone together for such a major change in Senate rules is way past slim.

Three-fifths of 99 is 59.4, so it would be up to the chair to make a ruling on rounding up or down. Rulings of the chair may be challenged and Senate Rule XX states that challenges will be decided by majority vote.

If you're a glutton for punishment, go to the Senate Web site and type the search term "cloture" into the little box at the top of the page.

---

by: Tim Ashwell @ Wed Feb 04, 2009 at 13:06:10 PM CST

I believe, though (0.00 / 0)

that there is long-established precedent on rounding, and they round up.

---

by: elwood @ Wed Feb 04, 2009 at 13:08:48 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Correct, But... (4.00 / 1)

Yes, they've always round up - but who's to say the chair couldn't decide this time to round down?

Then the ruling would be challenged and that would be fillibustered and by the time everything was settled, the economy would have recovered on its own.

---

by: Tim Ashwell @ Wed Feb 04, 2009 at 13:48:07 PM CST

[ Parent ]

I screwed up (0.00 / 0)

I didn't recognize the two forms of cloture votes.

Thanks.

The giant checks its pockets.

Regrets? None!  

---

by: Jack Mitchell @ Wed Feb 04, 2009 at 13:14:51 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Okay Sleeping 'Bama (0.00 / 0)

we all screw up sometimes...as Al Franken once said, you're smart enough, nice enough, and gosh darn it people like you...

Without deviation from the norm, 'progress' is not possible.

~Frank Zappa

---

by: JonnyBBad @ Wed Feb 04, 2009 at 13:19:42 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Speaking of screw-ups... (4.00 / 1)

That would be a misquote. Senator-elect Al Franken said, "I'm good enough, I'm smart enough, and doggone it, people like me."

IT for John Lynch '04 and NHDP '08 - I'm liking my track record so far!

---

by: RealNRH @ Wed Feb 04, 2009 at 13:27:24 PM CST

[ Parent ]

What could possibly go wrong? (4.00 / 3)

HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA ha ha ...

Cough!

Uncontrollable sobs ....

---

by: JimC @ Wed Feb 04, 2009 at 13:22:34 PM CST

It may be the Perfect Crime (4.00 / 2)

Judd has a plausible-sounding reason for recusing himself, and his replacement doesn't have to cast a vote yet. The Republicans get the crucial vote with nobody taking the heat.

All it required was the pro-active cooperation of the White victim...

---

by: elwood @ Wed Feb 04, 2009 at 13:27:28 PM CST

[ Parent ]

No ONE to blame (4.00 / 1)

But we can blame them ALL.

---

by: JimC @ Wed Feb 04, 2009 at 13:31:41 PM CST

[ Parent ]

('of the victim') (0.00 / 0)

That was going to be 'of the White House' and my editing garbled it.

---

by: elwood @ Wed Feb 04, 2009 at 15:07:39 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Resign or vote (4.00 / 1)

We are still paying his salary to represent New Hampshire, so he should resign or vote.  But even then, the votes may not be there consistently for cloture. Look at Mary Landrieu (D) yesterday.

"When you get to the end of your rope, tie a knot and hang on."  Franklin D. Roosevelt    

---

by: Kathy Sullivan 2 @ Wed Feb 04, 2009 at 13:47:27 PM CST

Demand Judd Vote! (4.00 / 1)

yes, I will join that campaign.

Do we have a breakdown of some projects in New Hampshire that may be affected by the package?

---

by: Mike Caulfield @ Wed Feb 04, 2009 at 14:39:56 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Yes. (0.00 / 0)

Sent out from the Whit House today.

See here.

---

by: elwood @ Wed Feb 04, 2009 at 15:05:19 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Absent With (0.00 / 0)

Obama & Lynch?

The giant checks its pockets.

Regrets? None!  

---

by: Jack Mitchell @ Wed Feb 04, 2009 at 13:53:23 PM CST

Some humble advice for our Democratic leaders, (4.00 / 4)

Dear Majority Leader Reid,
If the Republicans threaten to filibuster the stimulus, call their bluff.  Maybe you can't do it for every bill, but you can do it for this one.  Let them read dictionaries on C-SPAN 24/7 for a week while the President goes on camera talking about obstructionism and being on the wrong side of history.

Dear Mr. President,
This is a big bill.  A very big bill.  It's historic, and as with anything a President does that meets the test of being historic, you have the option of addressing the nation in prime time to explain why it matters.  It's a speech.  You're pretty good at speeches.

---

by: Douglas E. Lindner @ Wed Feb 04, 2009 at 17:39:27 PM CST

Resign or vote n/t (0.00 / 0)

"When you get to the end of your rope, tie a knot and hang on."  Franklin D. Roosevelt    

---

by: Kathy Sullivan 2 @ Wed Feb 04, 2009 at 19:23:31 PM CST