DeVos could be in trouble

[FuzzyLumpkins]

http://www.politico.com/story/2017/02/susan-collins-betsy-devos-confirmation-234497

Susan Collins says she is leaning against voting for Education Department nominee Betsy DeVos, potentially imperiling her nomination.

The moderate Maine Republican could become one of the first GOP senators to vote against one of Trump's nominees. No Democrats are expected to vote for DeVos, a GOP megadonor and education advocate who has long pushed for charter schools and K-12 tuition vouchers using public funds.

"I'm still working through that but I'm leaning against her. But I will, in keeping with my tradition, vote for cloture," Collins said in an interview, referring to a vote to advance DeVos to a final vote.

Collins cautioned that she is still reviewing DeVos, who has drawn bipartisan criticism for her views on education.

"I'm still working through my decision making," Collins said.

[spurraider21]

If she votes cloture it doesn't matter

[boutons_deux]

Repugs killed the rule that at least one Dem on a committee had to be present to force 2 nominees past the Dem boycott.

I expect Repugs are ready do that all the nominees.

And then kill what remains of the filibuster rule.

[DarrinS]

WASHINGTON — When President-elect Donald Trump looks to the Senate for confirmation of his Cabinet nominees next year, he'll have outgoing Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid to thank for Democrats' powerlessness to block his choices.

The Nevada Democrat, a fierce Trump opponent who often referred to the president-elect as "a spoiled brat," took dramatic action in 2013 to end Republicans' ability to mount a filibuster to derail President Obama's judicial and Cabinet nominees.

Reid, who was majority leader at the time, used a parliamentary move known as the "nuclear option" to change a nearly 40-year-old Senate rule. The change meant that the Senate now needs only a simple majority of 51 votes — rather than a super-majority of 60 — to proceed to confirmation votes on Cabinet secretaries, agency directors and judges, except for the Supreme Court.


Reid, who leaves a legacy as a master parliamentarian, said he's still glad he did it, despite the fact that the rule change will now be used by the Republican majority to help Trump staff his administration.

"We changed the Senate rules to guarantee a president’s nominees a fair, simple-majority vote," he wrote in a recent op-ed in The New York Times. "I doubt any of us envisioned Donald J. Trump’s becoming the first president to take office under the new rules. But what was fair for President Obama is fair for President Trump."


:lol

[Spurminator]

Republicans know Hillary's not running anymore, right? What is the benefit of falling in lock step with every single one of Trump's picks?

[DarrinS]

Republicans know Hillary's not running anymore, right? What is the benefit of falling in lock step with every single one of Trump's picks?

What is the point of objecting to each and every one of Trump's picks?

[baseline bum]

Republicans know Hillary's not running anymore, right? What is the benefit of falling in lock step with every single one of Trump's picks?

DeVos is pretty mainstream Republican, why wouldn't they fall in line for her?

[boutons_deux]

2 Repugs are against DeVos, it's tied. Christian Taliban Pence is tie breaker.

[Spurminator]

What is the point of objecting to each and every one of Trump's picks?

I don't know, ask someone from the fictional universe where Democrats have voted party line on every Trump choice. That's not currently happening.

[Spurminator]

DeVos is pretty mainstream Republican, why wouldn't they fall in line for her?

Question is less about DeVos, more about the total acquiescence to every Trump choice from a party that less than a year ago was, by and large, calling him dangerous for the country.

[spurraider21]

Seriously :lol... Even Warren gave Ben carson the green light

[Mitch]

What is the point of objecting to each and every one of Trump's picks?

Grandstanding, all politicians do it.

[SnakeBoy]

Question is less about DeVos, more about the total acquiescence to every Trump choice from a party that less than a year ago was, by and large, calling him dangerous for the country.

No the question is why would they go against Trump and vote against a nominee they agree with

[Splits]

I don't know, ask someone from the fictional universe where Democrats have voted party line on every Trump choice. That's not currently happening.

lol DarrinPiss

[Spurminator]

No the question is why would they go against Trump and vote against a nominee they agree with

I think I'll interpret my own questions, thanks.

Plenty of reasons to vote against DeVos besides ideology anyway.

[DarrinS]

lol DarrinPiss

The burn

[SnakeBoy]

I think I'll interpret my own questions, thanks.

Plenty of reasons to vote against DeVos besides ideology anyway.

Okay. Let us know when you figure out the answer.