The challenges ahead (Biden's America)

[Voronwë the Faithful]

You really need to post a link if you are going to make a provocative statement like that, which I doubt is a completely accurate one.

[Inanna]

I read it as NEB’s opinion.

[Voronwë the Faithful]

An opinion has to be based on something.

Manchin and Sinema have stated previously that they are not willing to vote to eliminate the filibuster. They have reiterated that position. (link) They have not stated or implied in any way that they would rather have McConnell be in charge of the Senate. That, with all due respect, a ridiculous interpolation of the statements that they have made.

[Frelga]

That's the effect of their position, isn't it?

[Voronwë the Faithful]

No. Not even remotely.

ETA: No one claimed that any Republican senators wanted Chuck Schumer to be "in control of the Senate" when they didn't eliminate the filibister when they controlled both Houses of congress and the presidency. That would be exactly the same thing.

[N.E. Brigand]

No. Not even remotely.

ETA: No one claimed that any Republican senators wanted Chuck Schumer to be "in control of the Senate" when they didn't eliminate the filibister when they controlled both Houses of congress and the presidency. That would be exactly the same thing.

I don't remember Chuck Schumer blocking the organizing resolution to prevent the Republican majority from exercising the power of the majority, and relenting only when two Republican senators said they'd never repeal the filibuster (or made some other concession to Democrats).

Prior to McConnell's capitulation, Sinema was effectively blocking herself from chairing two subcommittees. Ergo my take that she preferred Democrats not being in control.

Manchin was even asked in an interview today what he wanted in exchange for taking a step to force McConnell's hand and actually let Democrats take control. He said he didn't want anything, and that Schumer and McConnell would just have to come to terms. Sinema lliewise gave no indication as to what she actually wanted.

As far as we know, McConnell got nothing from Schumer. At the exact same time that McConnell finally relented, MSNBC was airing an interview with Schumer in which he said that McCconnell would get nothing from him. McConnell himself claims he relented because Sinema and Manchin publicly stated they wouldn't repeal the filibuster. Five long days passed between Democrats getting 50 votes and Democrats actually being able to take over. Five days in the midst of a raging pandemic. Five days Schumer won't get back. Five days that McConnell managed to block Democratic action despite himself being in the minority. The joke three weeks ago was that West Virginia and Arizona were going to get a lot of perks in exchange for those senators' votes. Jon Tester, another Democratic senator from a red state, has already hinted that he's willing to go along with big moves Schumer might make as long as he can deliver goodies to Montana. But to all appearances, in my opinion, Manchin's and Sinema's highest priority is to not make waves: they would prefer to vote as little as possible, because the smaller a record they have, the less that can be used against them.

[Voronwë the Faithful]

I am really, really surprised to see you make such ridiculous statements, N.E.B.

In any event, as you note, McConnell backed down, as he always was going to inevitably do.

[Alatar]

I don't think you're upholding your own standards for courtesy and respect here V.

[Voronwë the Faithful]

My apologies. Though I stand by the statement that the claim that Sinema and Manchin indicated that they wanted McConnell to be in charge of the Senate has no basis in reality. I don't necessarily agree with their refusal to consider eliminating the legislative filibuster, but I certainly don't think that it makes them not Democrats. That's the kind of claim that Donald Trump likes to make about so-called "RINOs" when they don't sufficiently agree with him. We are better than that.

[N.E. Brigand]

I don't think you're upholding your own standards for courtesy and respect here V.

For the record, I wasn't bothered by the tone of V's response. We just disagree. Democrats need to go big, but too often too many of them seem (to me) to be unwilling to do so. I actually had a conversation about this with my Congresswoman last year. I called her office to urge she take some action, and it turns out she was answering the phones herself that day, and I felt she was giving me a song and dance about how actually Congressional Democrats just didn't have much leverage. "Well, you know Democrats only control one half of one of three branches of government." Yes, I know that, I said, but I still don't see you doing anything to pressure Republicans on this issue: and if you are doing something about it behind the scenes, then you need to let people know.

I now don't remember what issue it was we spoke about (I've called her office quite a number of times over the past few years, but I think it might have been, in May or June, about the need for an election security bill), but an issue where I believe this was the case was impeachments, or more precisely the impeachment that didn't happen. It seemed to me that Democrats followed rather than led public opinion. Elizabeth Warren read the Mueller report, saw that Donald Trump clearly obstructed justice, and called for impeachment. But overall, I thought Democrats let Bill Barr guide public opinion, and then they pointed to public opinion as a reason not to impeach. They did the very least they could to seem to be taking the issue seriously, which mostly amounted to shaking their heads. And because they let Trump off the hook, he felt emboldened to push forward his Ukraine plot.

[N.E. Brigand]

Trump's original cabinet nominees, ordered by number of votes received and showing their last day in office and length of service in that role.

100-0 -- David Shulkin, Veterans' Affairs -- last day Mar. 28, 2018 (=14 months)
98-1 -- James Mattis, Defense -- Jan. 1, 2019 (23 months)
93-6 -- Elaine Chao, Transportation -- Jan. 11, 2021 (47 months)
88-11 -- John Kelly, Homeland Security -- Jan. 2, 2019 (23 months)
87-11 -- Sonny Perdue, Agriculture -- Jan. 20, 2021 (21 months)
72-27 -- Wilbur Ross, Commerce -- Jan. 20, 2021 (47 months)
68-31 -- Ryan Zinke, Interior -- Jan. 2, 2019 (22 months)
62-37 -- Rick Perry, Energy -- Dec. 1, 2019 (45 months)
58-41 -- Ben Carson, Housing and Urban Development -- Jan. 20, 2021 (46 months)
56-43 -- Rex Tillerson, State -- Mar. 31, 2018 (14 months)
53-47 -- Steven Mnuchin, Treasury -- Jan. 20, 2021 (47 months)
52-47 -- Tom Price, Health and Human Services -- Sep. 29, 2017 (8 months)
52-47 -- Jeff Sessions, Attorney General -- Nov. 7, 2018 (21 months)
51-50 -- Betsy DeVos, Education -- Jan. 8, 2021 (47 months)
n/a -- Andrew Pudzer, Labor, withdrawn (replaced by Alex Acosta, 60-38 -- July 19, 2019 (27 months))

Obama's original nominees:

n/a -- Robert Gates, Defense (appointed by George W. Bush in 2006) -- last day June 23, 2011 (= 29 months for Pres. Obama)
v.v. -- Tom Vilsack, Agriculture -- Jan. 13, 2017 (96 months)
v.v. -- Arne Duncan, Education -- Jan. 1, 2016 (83 months)
v.v. -- Stephen Chu, Energy -- Apr. 22, 2013 (51 months)
v.v. -- Janet Napolitano, Homeland Security -- Sep. 6, 2013 (56 months)
v.v. -- Shaun Donovan, Housing and Urban Development -- July 28, 2014 (66 months)
v.v. -- Ken Salazar, Interior -- Apr. 12, 2013 (51 months)
v.v. -- Ray LaHood, Transportation -- July 2, 2013 (53 months)
v.v. -- Eric Shinseki, Veterans Affairs -- May 30, 2014 (64 months)
94-2 -- Hillary Clinton, State -- Feb. 1, 2013 (48 months)
80-17 -- Hilda Solis, Labor -- Jan. 22, 2013 (47 months)
75-21 -- Eric Holder, Attorney General -- Apr. 27, 2015 (75 months)
60-34 -- Tim Geithner, Treasury -- Jan. 25, 2013 (48 months)
n/a -- Bill Richardson, Commerce, withdrawn (replaced by Judd Gregg, also withdrawn, then by Gary Locke, v.v. -- Aug. 1, 2011 (29 months))
n/a -- Tom Daschle, Health and Human Services, withdrawn (replaced by Kathleen Sebelius, 65-31 -- June 9, 2014 (62 months))

I've used the abbreviation "v.v." for voice votes, in which the Senate didn't bother with a formal vote and just asked for unanimous consent to which no one objected, so there was no count.

I will revisit and edit this post (the one where I'm writing now) as Biden's cabinet nominees are confirmed (and if I remember, when they leave), so all this information is on one place.

93-2 Lloyd Austin, Defense -- confirmed Jan. 22, 2021
92-7 Tom Vilsack, Agriculture -- Feb. 23, 2021
87-7 Denis McDonough, Veterans' Affairs -- Feb. 8, 2021
87-13 Pete Buttigieg, Transportation -- Feb. 2, 2021
84-15 Janet Yellen, Treasury -- Jan. 25, 2021
84-15 Gina Raimondo, Commerce -- Mar. 1, 2021
78-22 Anthony Blinken, State -- Jan. 26, 2021
70-30 Merrick Garland, Attorney General -- Mar. 10, 2021
68-29 Marty Walsh, Labor -- Mar. 23, 2021
66-34 Marcia Fudge, Housing and Urban Development -- Mar. 10, 2021
64-35 Jennifer Granholm, Energy -- Feb. 25, 2021
64-33 Miguel Cardona, Education -- Mar. 1, 2021
56-43 Alejandro Mayorkas, Homeland Security -- Feb. 2, 2021
51-40 Deb Haaland, Interior -- Mar. 15, 2021
50-49 Xavier Becerra, Health and Human Services -- Mar. 18, 2021

[N.E. Brigand]

I will revisit and edit this post (the one where I'm writing now) as Biden's cabinet nominees are confirmed (and if I remember, when they leave), so all this information is on one place.

On the subject of nominations, something interesting I just read: Mike Pompeo, Donald Trump's second secretary of state (Apr. 2018-Jan. 2021 (=34 months)), was confirmed by a vote of 57-42. Five Democrats joined the Republican majority to vote for Pompeo. All five of them were up for reelection later in 2018. Of those five, four lost: Heidi Heitkamp (ND), Joe Donnelly (IN), Bill Nelson (FL), and Claire McCaskill (MO). McCaskill was taunted about the possibility that she wouldn't vote for Pompeo by her Republican opponent, who went on to beat her in November despite (or because of?) her having done as he demanded: Josh Hawley. The only Democrat to vote for Pompeo and win was Joe Manchin (WV). Make of that what you will.

[N.E. Brigand]

Per Daniel Dale at CNN, Joe Biden is issuing executive orders or memorandums:
--directing the Dept. of Justice not to renew contracts with private prisons;
--directing the Dept. of Housing and Urban Development to change the Trump administration's policies regarding fair housing;
--recommitting all federal agencies "to engage in regular, robust, and meaningful consultation with Tribal governments"; and
--recognizing and opposing discrimination against Asian Americans and Pacific Islanders.

Those all sound like progress to me. But as regards the first one, the Biden administration says it's only DoJ that's affected; the order does not apply to private prisons contracted by the Dept. of Homeland Security, i.e., private immigration prisons.

[Voronwë the Faithful]

I don't think you're upholding your own standards for courtesy and respect here V.

For the record, I wasn't bothered by the tone of V's response. We just disagree. Democrats need to go big, but too often too many of them seem (to me) to be unwilling to do so. I actually had a conversation about this with my Congresswoman last year. I called her office to urge she take some action, and it turns out she was answering the phones herself that day, and I felt she was giving me a song and dance about how actually Congressional Democrats just didn't have much leverage. "Well, you know Democrats only control one half of one of three branches of government." Yes, I know that, I said, but I still don't see you doing anything to pressure Republicans on this issue: and if you are doing something about it behind the scenes, then you need to let people know.

I now don't remember what issue it was we spoke about (I've called her office quite a number of times over the past few years, but I think it might have been, in May or June, about the need for an election security bill), but an issue where I believe this was the case was impeachments, or more precisely the impeachment that didn't happen. It seemed to me that Democrats followed rather than led public opinion. Elizabeth Warren read the Mueller report, saw that Donald Trump clearly obstructed justice, and called for impeachment. But overall, I thought Democrats let Bill Barr guide public opinion, and then they pointed to public opinion as a reason not to impeach. They did the very least they could to seem to be taking the issue seriously, which mostly amounted to shaking their heads. And because they let Trump off the hook, he felt emboldened to push forward his Ukraine plot.

I'm glad you weren't bothered by the tone of my post. I don't think we disagree all that much. I too think that Democrats need to be more proactive. I just disagree with you that Sinema's and Manchin's opposition to eliminating the filibuster mean that they want McConnell to be in charge of the senate. I disagree with them on that position (reluctantly), but I don't think it remotely means that they actually want to McConnell to be in charge.

[N.E. Brigand]

Urk. Senator Leahy, the most senior Democrat and thus the Senate's president pro tempore, was feeling unwell and has been sent to the hospital for observation.

[Voronwë the Faithful]

I just heard that. I hope it is not serious.

[Voronwë the Faithful]

Per Daniel Dale at CNN, Joe Biden is issuing executive orders or memorandums:
--directing the Dept. of Justice not to renew contracts with private prisons;
--directing the Dept. of Housing and Urban Development to change the Trump administration's policies regarding fair housing;
--recommitting all federal agencies "to engage in regular, robust, and meaningful consultation with Tribal governments"; and
--recognizing and opposing discrimination against Asian Americans and Pacific Islanders.

Those all sound like progress to me. But as regards the first one, the Biden administration says it's only DoJ that's affected; the order does not apply to private prisons contracted by the Dept. of Homeland Security, i.e., private immigration prisons.

Progress, but not nearly enough, and it does nothing to address the critical issues related to policing. Hopefully that will be coming soon as well. Most racial justice activists that I know were fairly disappointed by the actions today.

[Frelga]

How much oversight does the executive branch have over local PDs?

[River]

Not a huge amount, though Obama's AG's had a tendency to investigate and impose consent decrees on departments that had brutality problems (like in Seattle...that business on Capitol Hill was a long time coming and thoroughly earned by the SPD). I suspect, while everyone is eager, Biden's not going to move much on policing until he has his people in charge at DoJ. Just a hunch, so please don't ask me to justify it.

I'd like to see the private immigration prisons either closed or put under some pretty strict oversight. Those places were notoriously dangerous and unhealthy even before COVID.

[Frelga]

Do you think this one is going anywhere?

Sen. Tom Carper has introduced S. 51, The Washington D.C. Admission Act, to make D.C. the 51st state.