- cross-posted to:
- news@kbin.social
- cross-posted to:
- news@kbin.social
The Pentagon says there are 301 generals and admirals whose nominations have been placed in limbo because of an indefinite “hold” by Sen. Tommy Tuberville, a Republican from Alabama, who wants the military to change its policy of reimbursing servicemembers for travel to get reproductive care, including abortions.
By the end of the year, the Pentagon says that number could swell to 650 generals and admirals who need Senate confirmation before they can assume their jobs. Any single senator can put a hold on nominations under Senate rules.
Look, we all know Coach doesn’t give a rats ass about the military, and is just grandstanding. You can tell he doesn’t take his job seriously because everyone calls him “Coach”, not “Senator”. It’s like it’s all a game to him.
But I’m sick of hearing about Senate rules and traditions like they’re etched in stone. Mitch certainly didn’t care when he made up one rule when the other guy was President, then a totally different rule when his guy was. Chuck needs to grow a pair and fix the rules that permit one Coach to sabotage our military readiness.
Yes, but the Democrats are not in control of the Senate. They hold the leadership role, but there are only 48 Democrats. There are three independents which caucus with them, and only two of those are liberal. The lynchpin is still Manchin who, while a Democrat by party affiliation, is a moderate Republican in nearly all facets of belief. That leaves just 49 votes likely to be counted on in a party-line vote, which is not enough to allow Harris to cast a 50-50 tie-breaker. Add in that California’s Feinstein is so addled that she doesn’t realize she is actively harming the party and her constituents by being an absentee lawmaker - mentally, even when (rarely) physically present - and the control available to advance rule changes are non-existent. If it weren’t for Manchin and Sinema in 2021, they could have added both DC and PR as he 51st and 52nd states (both have formally requested admission by vote in the past, iirc), pushing the number of D senators into a solid majority. Those two would not allow that because it would have eliminated their power over the Senate leaders.
AFAIK, fillibuster applies. So you actually need 60 votes to really do anything controversial (with a handful of exceptions). So no, having those two people wouldn’t have made a difference. We’d need 10 half decent republicans and those don’t exist.
IMO the blame needs to be correctly focused. As awful as they are, bad things aren’t happening because of 2 senators who were elected as Democrats (but don’t vote like them). The bad things happen because of the many, many republican senators who almost consistently refuse to vote for morally right bills.
Like, there’s no good reason for PR and DC to not be states. Except for the fact that they’d both lean Democrat, so the GOP cannot allow it. They care only about winning, not democracy.
One of those two Independants is Bernie Sanders, whose record is well known. The other is Angus King, who considers himself a “moderate”, but his voting record shows he’s somewhat sane and would probably not hold up a rule change like this. Chuck has 50 votes if he presses it.