Senate in Session for 12 Seconds

[Joshua Rhodes]

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- In one of the shortest session in its history, the Senate's final session of the year lasted a total of 12 seconds Monday.
Only one senator, Democrat Jack Reed of Rhode Island, was in the chamber to gavel open the Senate and adjourn it until January 3.
Monday's event was the latest in a series of "pro forma" sessions the Senate has called. Pro forma means "for the sake of formality" and these micro sessions are part of the last political scuffle between the White House and the Democratic-led Congress.
Democrats are keeping the Senate in session to block President Bush from making any recess appointments. During congressional recesses, a constitutional mechanism allows the president to fill top government posts for up to one year without Senate confirmation.

http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/12/31/senate.pro.forma/index.html

 

[standingfirminChrist]

wonder how much of the taxpayer's dollars they spent opening for a mere 12 seconds?

 

[StefanM]

wonder how much of the taxpayer's dollars they spent opening for a mere 12 seconds?

It would be better if Bush just nominated an acceptable candidate. Recess appointments were never intended to be an end-run around Congress.

 

[webdog]

It's Bush's fault...

 

[just-want-peace]

It would be better if Bush just nominated an acceptable candidate. Recess appointments were never intended to be an end-run around Congress.

There are certainly enough REAL complaints against Pres. Bush's policies to not have to resort to some nit-pickin' drivel such as this: "an acceptable candidate"!

Any candidate that fits the current D congress's definition of "acceptable" is not gonna be any good for this country.

 

[StefanM]

There are certainly enough REAL complaints against Pres. Bush's policies to not have to resort to some nit-pickin' drivel such as this: "an acceptable candidate"!

Any candidate that fits the current D congress's definition of "acceptable" is not gonna be any good for this country.

Well, then the vast majority of Bush's appointments are not going to be any good.

The hangup is over ONE person. If Bush simply nominates a less controversial person, this will not be an issue, but he refuses.

 

[EdSutton]

It's Bush's fault...

Always!

Ed

 

[JamieinNH]

Congraulations to the Democrats for finally learning how to play the game the Republicans have always known how to play.

In this game, the only object is the get what you want.. The only rule is: stay within the rules even if it's only for 12 seconds.

Stefan called it right.. If Bush wants to push the issue, it will be done in the Senate and not by appointment. If he really wanted to filled that vacancy, he could pick a less controversial person.

It isn't Bush's fault per sec, it's just the way he liked to do business. His attitude is/was if you won't appoint this person, I will.. Well that won't happen anymore. No more blank checks!

Jamie

 

[webdog]

Always!

Ed

That's my new reply to everything bad that happens in the world.

"My car broke down"

"...Bush's fault"

 

[carpro]

It would be better if Bush just nominated an acceptable candidate. Recess appointments were never intended to be an end-run around Congress.

Perhaps. But...

Clinton made 140 recess appointments. I don't remember any 12 second sessions conducted by Republicans during his terms in office.

 

[carpro]

Congraulations to the Democrats for finally learning how to play the game the Republicans have always known how to play.


Jamie

Clinton made 140 recess appointments. I don't remember any 12 second sessions conducted by Republicans during his terms in office.

 

[JamieinNH]

Clinton made 140 recess appointments. I don't remember any 12 second sessions conducted by Republicans during his terms in office.

Your point being?

My point was that either side know how to "get what they want".. In this instance it was to hold session for 12 seconds. The Republicans have used a number of tricks to "get what they want" over the course of time...

I laugh at people that find this appalling. We should find our entire Congress appalling, and yet we still want to draw sides..

They, the ENTIRE congress, are corrupt and will do whateve it takes to "get what they want"

I don't agree or disagree with what the Democrats are currently doing. I just see they are playing the game, and it appears to be fair play, or legal as some would say.

Until you get up in arms about what BOTH sides or/have done, don't tell me about the big ole' bad Democrats. That is my point.

Jamie

 

[JamieinNH]

Clinton made 140 recess appointments. I don't remember any 12 second sessions conducted by Republicans during his terms in office.

I just did a quick check and it looks like Bush has already done 165 recess appointments himself... He a bit ahead of Clinton, but I would guess that those days are over for him now.

Jamie

 

[StefanM]

Your point being?

My point was that either side know how to "get what they want".. In this instance it was to hold session for 12 seconds. The Republicans have used a number of tricks to "get what they want" over the course of time...

I laugh at people that find this appalling. We should find our entire Congress appalling, and yet we still want to draw sides..

They, the ENTIRE congress, are corrupt and will do whateve it takes to "get what they want"

I don't agree or disagree with what the Democrats are currently doing. I just see they are playing the game, and it appears to be fair play, or legal as some would say.

Until you get up in arms about what BOTH sides or/have done, don't tell me about the big ole' bad Democrats. That is my point.

Jamie

Well said. Neither Republican or Democrats are innocent. For the record, I oppose any use of recess appointments to circumvent Congressional confirmation. They should be used only when an appointment is immediately necessary and Congress is not in session.

 

[Pastor Larry]

It would be better if Bush just nominated an acceptable candidate.

Or the Democrats could simply vote him down. Why don't they do that?

 

[carpro]

I just did a quick check and it looks like Bush has already done 165 recess appointments himself... He a bit ahead of Clinton, but I would guess that those days are over for him now.

Jamie

Did you also check to see how many 12 second sessions Republicans held to stop Clinton recess appointments?

 

[JamieinNH]

Did you also check to see how many 12 second sessions Republicans held to stop Clinton recess appointments?

No, the fact that is was 12 seconds doesn't mean a thing to me, unlike yourself.

To me, all gimmicks to bend the rules are bad. It doesn't matter if it takes 12 seconds or 12 weeks.

Jamie

 

[just-want-peace]

JamieinNH:

No, the fact that is was 12 seconds doesn't mean a thing to me,--

Pastor Larry:

Or the Democrats could simply vote him down. Why don't they do that?

Makes sense to me. As opposed to playing a game of "KING OF THE HILL" like a bunch of 10 yr. olds.

Obviously maturity and reasonable dealings just don't fit the current congress' mentality!

 

[JamieinNH]

Makes sense to me. As opposed to playing a game of "KING OF THE HILL" like a bunch of 10 yr. olds.

Obviously maturity and reasonable dealings just don't fit the current congress' mentality!

Actually I agree, but I would go further. It's been a "king of the hill" game for a long time now. we have given our congress way too much latitude and it shows.

It's not just the current congress, it's been happening for a long time, and will continue to happen until we wake up and take back our country and that includes congress. We the people, have to stop taking sides and come together for real change. Let the outstanding, honest people that we need in congress from forth and let's elect them no matter which party they're with. Elect the man, not the party.

Jamie

 

[just-want-peace]

Actually I agree, but I would go further. It's been a "king of the hill" game for a long time now. we have given our congress way too much latitude and it shows.

It's not just the current congress, it's been happening for a long time, and will continue to happen until we wake up and take back our country and that includes congress. We the people, have to stop taking sides and come together for real change. Let the outstanding, honest people that we need in congress from forth and let's elect them no matter which party they're with. Elect the man, not the party.

Jamie

And with this post, we are in 100% agreement!!!!