Senate passes bill with only 2 Senators present

  • Thread starter Thread starter Monte_RCMS
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
That doesn’t sound very constitutional to me, but I can’t think of any legal objections off the top of my head.
 
The Senate (and the House) make up their own rules.

And Schumer was caught on tape stating that they could accomplish a lot of their goals by changing the Senate rules.

All I can say is: no more shortcuts.

Make them do their work.
 
Read the original article by the WSJ. It includes this little punch line:

There wasn’t a coup in the nation’s capital Thursday. Republicans agreed to the bill last week, and it had passed both the Senate and House already before falling foul of an element of congressional procedure enshrined in the Constitution. To avoid ruining vacations—and re-election campaigns—Republicans gave Messrs. Schumer and Cardin the OK to re-pass the bill themselves.

So due to a procedural glitch, these two men gave up part of their vacation to come and get it all down nice and legal. But the bill had already been voted on by the reps on both sides of the aisle. This final flurry was to cross the "T"s and dot the "i"s for posterity.

Much ado about nothing.
 
I’m surprised they found two that get along so well. Neither of them offered a single earmark or poison pill amendment.
 
sojo said:
So due to a procedural glitch, these two men gave up part of their vacation to come and get it all down nice and legal. But the bill had already been voted on by the reps on both sides of the aisle. This final flurry was to cross the "T"s and dot the "i"s for posterity.

Much ado about nothing.
Click to expand...
Yes, and the Republicans had also authorized Schumer and Cardin to do this miniature Senate session.

Still, I am not entirely comfortable with putting the full power of the US Senate in the hands of only two senators. As Cardin joked, they could approved all the judges who currently awaiting confirmation, and the judges would have been sworn in before the Senate reconvened.

According to the Wall Street Journal article, the House of Representatives came back from vacation to re-pass the bill. I’m not sure how many Representatives actually returned, but I am guessing it was more than two.
 
I would have thought that there would be a quorum to prevent this kind of thing.
 
BOTH of New York State’s U.S. Senate seats are up for grabs this coming November.

Senator Gillibrand’s seat holder, however, will take office IMMEDIATELY because it is a replacement election [former Senator Clinton became Secretary of State].

Senator Schumer’s seat holder will take office on January 1.

Gary Berntsen is running for Schumer’s seat.

spcnetwork.com/gary/nlet1.htm

For Gillibrand’s seat, David Malpass has received a couple of important endorsements for the primary election on September 14.

newsmax.com/DickArmey/Armey–David–Malpass–Senate–Freedomworks–Gillibrand/2010/08/13/id/367446

Excerpt:

Before he can face big government advocate Gillibrand, Malpass must first top Joe DioGuardi and GOP party insider Bruce Blakeman in the New York Senate GOP primary set for Sept. 14. Many concerned GOP members have already called on Blakeman to move aside in favor of Malpass.
 
For your friends in the Chuck Schumer fan-club:

[The recording was strictly forbidden, so they “snuck it” and the sound quality is not the best. Listen carefully.]

Secret Audio Tape of Chuck Schumer

Listen to this short segment on the Glenn Beck show to see the arrogance that Chuck Schumer brings to Washington. He wants to change Senate rules to get his unpopular, destructive agenda passed by the Senate:

youtube.com/watch?v=N9Dp9Jrzt30
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top