You have commented 339 times on Rantburg.

Your Name
Your e-mail (optional)
Website (optional)
My Original Nic        Pic-a-Nic        Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Bold Italic Underline Strike Bullet Blockquote Small Big Link Squish Foto Photo
Submit your comments on this article
Home Front: Politix
Tom Cotton suggests ordering sergeant at arms to force Dems to vote on nominations
2017-02-01
They did something like that in Wisconsin after they found the runaways...
[WASHINGTONEXAMINER] Arkansas Sen. Tom Cotton on Tuesday suggested ordering the sergeant at arms to force Democrats to vote for President Trump's nominees at the committee level, ratcheting up the rhetoric after Democrats delayed the votes with a boycott Tuesday morning.

"I don't know how long they plan to do this," the Republican said from the Senate floor. "I don't know if they intend to abscond out of the District, if we're going to have to vote to have the sergeant at arms track them down, haul them to work to do their business."

Gesturing toward the sergeant at arms, Cotton remarked that "he has a distinguished record in military and law enforcement. He could probably do that effectively."

Cotton is not a member of the Senate Finance Committee, which tried Tuesday morning to hold votes on the nominations of Steven Mnuchin to be treasury secretary and Rep. Tom Price of Georgia, to be secretary of health and human services. Democrats stopped the vote by refusing to show up and denying a quorum. At least one Democrat has to be present for a quorum.

Posted by:Fred

#5  dock their pay. No work no pay.
Posted by: Blackbeard Glutle8675   2017-02-01 17:53  

#4  IIRC, in mid-April '93 I was on the computer with C-SPAN covering the House Chamber in the background. Background noise, mostly, then I noticed that the Republican addressing the House was really pissed-off, not the faux outrage, but genuinely mad.
Synopsis: the previous afternoon the Budget Committee adjourned, the Republicans went home, the Democrats went to a White House meeting, pencilled in new numbers and met again without informing the minority members. Next morning the ranking minority member (Republican) got a single copy *AND* was told that the vote was scheduled at 1100 EST that same morning.

Sic transit bipartisanship -- for the rest of that Congress. Anyway, as long as the meetings are published in advance and not held in secret I personally would love to see this temper tantrum squashed like a bug.
Posted by: magpie   2017-02-01 13:07  

#3  I like the idea of a rules change better so the committees can vote without the donks. As long as they have a quorum they should get on with it.
Posted by: Abu Uluque   2017-02-01 10:55  

#2  If someone is sued and fails to answer the summons, a "summary judgement" is issued.  Do that now...
Posted by: M. Murcek   2017-02-01 08:37  

#1  Why not just take them out on a rail the next time they want to show up to fake instead of their Sworn Duty?
Posted by: newc   2017-02-01 04:17  

00:00