
Sen. Jim Bunning (R-KY), who has become a one-man filibuster of a bill to extend unemployment benefits, apparently placed a hold on all presidential nominees last week.
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid's office confirms to TPMDC that Bunning has placed the holds.
"It turns out that not only has he been blocking the unemployment insurance bill, he has also been blocking the confirmation of nominees since last week as well," said Reid spokesman Jim Manley.
Bunning's spokesman tells TPMDC that he doesn't know about the holds.
"I don't know that. Right now the senator's number one priority is reaching an agreement to get this bill paid for and passed," said the spokesman, Mike Reynard.
The senator, who is not seeking re-election this year, has been objecting to requests to bring an unemployment bill to the floor, grinding the Senate to a halt. Democrats say they haven't begun cloture proceedings to get around his objection because the process would take several days. Unemployment benefits for hundreds of thousands of people will expire over the next month without the extension.
(H/T Jay Newton-Small)
mans_best_friend
March 2, 2010 6:12 PM
Because the nominees aren't paid for, I guess.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
calchala
March 2, 2010 6:14 PM
Oh Jim Bunning, Why do you love democrats so? Seriously, is he a dem in disguise trying to show the ridiculousness of secret holds?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Langston_Hughes
March 2, 2010 9:05 PM in reply to calchala
Do you really think most people grasp that he's even a Republican when the Democrats refuse to call him out on this, and Obama refused to do so today? He's not helping Democrats, he severely harming the lives of many thousands of Americans. It's tragic. He ought to be condemned vocally by the Democratic leadership and forced to stay on the floor and filibuster nonstop, without any shutdown so that the Democrats can go sleep. Then maybe the American people will really see what's going on. But then again, maybe the Democrats care as little as he does, since all they do is whine and let the GOP stomp all over them.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
FlownOver
March 2, 2010 6:16 PM
To quote Roger Dorn, "I've only got one thing to say to you – strike this m*****f***er OUT!"
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
ronbyers
March 2, 2010 6:20 PM
Earth to Harry Reid. Grow a pair. Bunning is making you and the rest of the Democratic caucus look like weak kneed fools. Stop counting your campaign contributions long enough to do something, anything, to stop this clown.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Ethan
March 2, 2010 6:22 PM in reply to ronbyers
What? Are you advocating they kill him?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
mans_best_friend
March 2, 2010 6:25 PM in reply to Ethan
All Reid really has to do is tell Bunning to stick his holds in any convenient orifice and then bring the nominations to the floor. These aren't unanimous consent measures. Bunning can object all he wants.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
DownriverDem
March 3, 2010 9:07 AM in reply to ronbyers
Why? Bunning is just using the rules. That's how it goes in the Senate. Change the rules.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Ethan
March 2, 2010 6:23 PM
This man makes McCain look absolutely and completely lovable.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
sunnysteve
March 2, 2010 6:29 PM
He is doing nothing different than did Lieberman and Nelson, when one vote was necessary to finish health care legislation. In this case it is a bit worse, because Senate rules and custom allow a single Senator to secretly "hold" nominations from being brought forward and require unanimous consent to avoid a two day delay before voting on any bill, even emergency legislation. All of these cases illustrate how the Senate allows the performance of its duties to be hamstrung by its own "tradition" and the fantasy that they are all behaving like and treating each other like "gentleman". What a bunch of crap.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
laborlawyer
March 2, 2010 6:30 PM
Obama should immediately recess appoint all the nominees being held up, especially Becker and Searce to the NLRB. Enough of this nonsense!
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
dtOZONE
March 2, 2010 6:50 PM in reply to laborlawyer
Well first you would need the Senate to actually recess.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
ottis
March 2, 2010 6:32 PM
Looks like he is carrying the load for the Rethugs. I didn't think he had it in him but I think he has that adrenalin flowing.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Papa Oscar
March 2, 2010 8:46 PM in reply to ottis
Shouldn't forget that Bunning despises Mitch McConnell for basically forcing him not to run for re-election (which he would have lost on account of HE'S CRAZY). So any time it looks like McC might get a little credit for acting sane, Bunning is going to be in there throwing a little chin music...
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
laborlawyer
March 2, 2010 6:33 PM
Oh, and do away with this "hold" nonsense. Last time I checked our form of government wasn't based on a liberum veto.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Frank Pentangeli
March 2, 2010 6:34 PM
Yep. Recess appointments for all.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
The Commenter Formerly Known as NCSteve
March 2, 2010 7:30 PM in reply to Frank Pentangeli
And the fact that Congress is in session still bit of an impediment to that plan.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Davran
March 3, 2010 9:38 AM in reply to The Commenter Formerly Known as NCSteve
Easter is coming up.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
rbeats
March 2, 2010 6:37 PM
Wyden just said on MSNBC that they are gonna force the filibusterer tonight.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
mans_best_friend
March 2, 2010 6:50 PM in reply to rbeats
What's the over/under on how long this lasts? I'd suggest giving Bunning lots of water to drink so he has to go to the can, but then he'd just piss all over the Senate, just as he's been doing for years.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Brainpicnic
March 2, 2010 6:52 PM
Say it ain't so Bunny...
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
eratosthenes8
March 2, 2010 6:56 PM
How is it that people continue to give Republicans support?
Will someone explain it to me? Please?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
mans_best_friend
March 2, 2010 6:58 PM in reply to eratosthenes8
What's the matter with Kansas?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
hollywood
March 2, 2010 7:13 PM in reply to mans_best_friend
Well the short simple answer is that Kansas is Stupid!
Republicans play a sucker game and America is up to it's nipples in suckers.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
sunnysteve
March 2, 2010 7:05 PM in reply to eratosthenes8
Proud to be stupid.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Powkat
March 3, 2010 11:55 AM in reply to eratosthenes8
I've been asking this for a long time. No one can give me an answer - I've even asked some decent folks I know who are Republicans and their responses reflect some serious cognitive dissonance. On the other hand, I know some who are now registered independents because it's gotten too crazy for them. I think it's a hard time to be a rational conservative (if that's not an oxymoron.)
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Walter Mitty
March 2, 2010 7:04 PM
Dems are so damn weak!! The cut a friggin deal with Bunning rather than forcing him to filibuster publicly. He gets what he wanted - what a friggin great way to ensure more of this shit from Republicans.
Reid is an embarrassment and him losing in November would be addition by subtraction. What a despicable push-over
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
dtOZONE
March 2, 2010 8:15 PM in reply to Walter Mitty
He didn't get anything he wanted. WTF are you talking about?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
slb
March 2, 2010 7:07 PM
You would hope that a senator who is not running for re-election would use the freedom from having to face the electorate one last time to pursue the greater good even if it is not popular. Bunning appears to be using the remainder of his last term to send a giant F-U to the entire country.
Heck of a guy.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Glenn in NYC
March 2, 2010 7:09 PM
I don't understand why Reid didn't file for cloture last week when Bunning first objected. He could have had sessions over the weekend and this would have ripened by now. I mean, Bunning's an ass but people are hurting here, you've got to do what's necessary to help them.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Andreams
March 2, 2010 7:14 PM in reply to Glenn in NYC
I agree!
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
tytester
March 2, 2010 7:11 PM
This is a golden opportunity for the Senate Dems to get rid of the "secret hold" rule. There are appear to be multiple ways to do it ("nuclear" option included). Of course, it is not like getting rid of the fili-buster, but removing the "secret holds" is still a step in the right direction for the Senate as a whole.
(And no, I don't think the Senate Dems actually have the balls to rule "secret holds" out of order. I only point out that there would be hardly any other type of legislation that would be more suitable to actually change the Senate rules than legislation that extends unemployment benefits to 3-5 million unemployed Americans...)
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
georgia99
March 2, 2010 7:15 PM in reply to tytester
The nuclear option is clearly the way to go. A blanket hold can in no way be construed as Constitutional. Who's going to have the balls to invoke the point of order?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
georgia99
March 2, 2010 7:16 PM in reply to tytester
Either that or impeach the SOB
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Marinus van der Lubbe
March 2, 2010 7:15 PM
They're handing Obama recess appointments on a platter. Let Bunning run amuck. Makes no difference. He has had a secret hold on a lesbian appointee for over a week now.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Michael Lafferty
March 2, 2010 7:18 PM
Enough already. Can someone on our side—the nation's side, actually—just wander down to the dais, punch him in the wiener and end this stupidity?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Alex39
March 2, 2010 7:42 PM
Is anyone clear on whether these nominee holds are still effective, now that Bunning has stopped obstructing the extension of unemployment benefits? I'm getting mixed messages from different sources.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
DownriverDem
March 3, 2010 9:05 AM
I am not against the Senate being the slower body, but the way it is working now is obstruction. Why don't the Senate make the Senators really filibuster instead of just saying they will? So what if it would mean that it would appy to the Dems too when they are out of power. "We the people" would benefit big time to acutally "hear" the reasons for the filibuster.
Bunning is a jerk that was forced to not run again by the Repubs who will reward him with a high paying lobby job. He has enough money, why not just retire and let a young person get the job.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Tosh
June 6, 2010 2:15 AM
He is doing nothing different than did Lieberman and Nelson, when one vote was necessary to finish health care legislation. In this case it is a bit worse, because Senate rules and custom allow a single Senator to secretly "hold" nominations from being brought forward and require unanimous consent to avoid a two day delay before voting on any bill, even emergency legislation. All of these cases illustrate how the Senate allows the performance of its duties to be hamstrung by its own "tradition" and the fantasy that they are all behaving like and treating each other like "gentleman". What a bunch of crap.
m65 kamagra
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?