by Erik Hermes
Earlier this week Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) used the "Nuclear Option" to eliminate the free and open debate of judicial nominations. This tactic will limit the ability of Republicans to block Obama’s choices for executive-branch and most judicial posts.
What is the nuclear option?
The “nuclear option” refers to a move by the majority party in Senate — in this case the Democrats — to change the Senate rules to allow most executive branch and judicial nominations to be approved with a simple majority – 51 votes — rather than the 60 votes now required. Under longstanding rules, the minority party has been able to block a nomination with just 41 votes, commonly called a filibuster.
One Senator wasn’t afraid to stand up and speak against the nuclear option, he said: “Mr. President, I rise today to urge my colleagues to think about the implications of what has been called the nuclear option and what effect that might have on this Chamber and on this country. I urge all of us to think not just about winning every debate but about protecting free and democratic debate.”
Can you guess what Senator said that?
It’s a bit of a trick question, because that was Senator Barack Obama in 2005 about the Republican threat of the “Nuclear Option”. 8 years later; either he is no longer interested in protecting a free and democratic debate, or the Presidency has driven him power crazy. I’ll let you decide that one.
Ironically, then Senator Obama added: “The American people want less partisanship in this town, but everyone in this chamber knows that if the majority chooses to end the filibuster, if they choose to change the rules and put an end to democratic debate, then the fighting, the bitterness, and the gridlock will only get worse.” And included “Right now we are faced with rising gas prices, skyrocketing tuition costs, a record number of uninsured Americans, and some of the most serious national security threats we have ever had, while our bravest young men and women are risking their lives halfway around the world to keep us safe.”
As you probably have guessed other members of Congress in 2005; Harry Reid, Hillary Clinton, and Joe Biden spoke out against the Republican use of the “Nuclear Option”.
In 2005, Harry Reid defended his position in favor of the filibuster and said “The filibuster is not a scheme and it certainly isn't new. The filibuster is far from a procedural gimmick” .
Back then, the Democrats were successful in stopping the Republicans from using the “Nuclear Option”.
Now, in 2013 when the Democrats are implementing the “Nuclear Option”, how is Republican Majority Leader Mitch McConnell responding?
He pointed to the next Congress as a time when he hoped that he, as the new Senate majority leader, could make a Democratic minority shoulder the consequences of that action.
In other words, you must re-elect him before anything is done.
In January of this year, Harry Reid used the threat of the "nuclear option" to shorten debate on legislation and to limit the number of amendments that can be offered by senators. Mitch McConnell supported this change too while conservatives like Ted Cruz (R-TX) opposed it. Then in July, Harry Reid used the threat of the "nuclear option" again to confirm President Obama's radical nominees. Mitch McConnell backed down yet again, allowing every single nominee through, including Richard Cordray for the new Dodd-Frank agency, Gina McCarthy to head the EPA, Tom Perez as Secretary of Labor, two people of Obama's choosing to fill the vacant slots at the National Labor Relations Board, and Todd Jones to head ATF even though he was at the scene of the "Fast and Furious" scandal.
NO THANKS MITCH! This American is not going to award your inactions with his vote!
by Legate Damar
The Kentucky State Auditor Adam Edelen is conducting a “special examination” into the travel spending and policies of the Kenton County Airport Board, saying that the Cincinnati/Northern Kentucky International Airport is too vital an economic engine to allow unanswered questions about possible spending excesses and lack of oversight.
“CVG serves a metropolitan area of 2.1 million people and is critical to the economic vitality of Northern Kentucky and Southern Ohio,” Edelen said at a news conference. “Making sure this asset is run efficiently and effectively is a necessary step in attracting businesses and keeping jobs. The airport’s impact on Northern Kentucky and the entire commonwealth cannot be overstated. The airport is at an important crossroads in its 65-year history, and my goal is to provide a road map for improving operations and fostering growth (Ky. Auditor opens ‘special exam’ of CVG spending policies, 2013).”
Edelen said his office initially became interested in the situation at CVG following The Enquirer’s report in August that some members of the airport board had tried to fire chief executive officer Candace McGraw during a behind-closed-doors meeting (Ky. Auditor opens ‘special exam’ of CVG spending policies, 2013).
The Enquirer disclosed last month that the board had spent more than $140,000 on travel to conferences and expensive dinners, including a $20,000 trip to Italy by the board’s chairman and vice chairman last month.
by Terry Donoghue
On Monday November 18th the Boone County Tea Party will have KY State Senator John Schickel as the featured speaker. Senator Schickel will talk about what to look for in the upcoming session in Frankfort as well any bills that he intends to file. There are a lot of issues that needs to be addressed in the upcoming session and hopefully Senator Schickel will be receptive to our concerns as he has in the past. As always the meeting is at Shakey's in Florence . Starts at 6pm. Bring a friend and be informed.
by David Adams
1. This is a civil action for declaratory and injunctive relief relating to Defendants' acceptance of Common Core State Standards. Plaintiff seeks injunctive relief in the form of a court order reversing Defendants' illegal acceptance of Common Core State Standards and forbidding any continued action relating to same until such time as specific legislative approval is granted.
2. Time is of the essence in resolving this issue because substantial public resources have been and are currently being devoted to implementation of Common Core despite a clear constitutional mandate intended to provide for an efficient system of common schools. Continued delay in limiting the state officials’ activities in this matter to within the scope of Kentucky law and the Constitution of the Commonwealth of Kentucky sets a terrible precedent for ignoring constitutional limits on executive and legislative branch authority to protect Kentuckians’ rights to seek and pursue their safety and happiness as explicitly guaranteed by the Kentucky Constitution.
3. The judicial branch of the Commonwealth of Kentucky is the only remaining venue for redress available to Plaintiff.
4. As a result of the actions of Defendants, Plaintiff respectfully seeks a temporary and permanent injunction against Defendants' continued implementation of Common Core until such time as the General Assembly provides appropriate legislation to restore constitutionally mandated efficiency to the Commonwealth's system of common schools.
Read more @ networkedblogs.com