Read on Twitter
McConnell made clear that tomorrow he'll seek consent to adjourn for ~2 weeks. Before a bunch of Rs got Covid a big benefit to keeping the floor open was the ability to force Rs off the trail & onto the floor. But thatâs dangerous when we donât know how many of them are infected.
By adjourning to pro formas Dems lock in that there'll be no floor vote on ACB for the next 2 weeks. It deprives them of tactics like forcing live quorums but also increases the chances they donât get covid. With a real covid outbreak among Senate Rs, the pros outweigh the cons.
On quorums: To vote or conduct any business in the Senate you need a quorum of 51 senators physically present on the floor. It appears Dems can deny a quorum right now, but the real question is whether they can do so when Republicans are ready to vote on Barrett. Thatâs TBD.
In the meantime: Judiciary Committee rules state that 2 members of the minority must be present for the committee to vote. Whether or not Dems participate in the hearings, they should deny Judiciary a quorum to vote on ACB's nomination. They have the power to do this and should.
What does that do? If Republicans still control a majority within Judiciary, they can change or suspend the committee's rules and vote ACB out favorably even if Dems deny a quorum in committee. Republicans did this in the EPW committee with Pruitt. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2017/02/02/senate-republicans-suspend-committee-rules-to-approve-trumps-epa-nominee/
But even if Republicans can do it, forcing them to change Judiciary's rules just to force Barrett's nomination to the floor would be unprecedented. It would taint the process and ACB's legitimacy with actions, not just words. It is very clearly worth the effort by Democrats.
This is a big moment for Feinstein. While she can't control what other Democrats on the Judiciary committee do, she can call for them to deny a quorum for the committee's vote on Barrett's nomination. If she did, there's little question that Dems would rally behind her.
To sum up: thereâs not much lost by adjourning for 2 weeks and much to be gained in safety and knowing thereâll be no floor vote on ACB. Dems should deny quorums - in Judiciary, where they can no matter what; and on the floor if Rs cannot command 51 when it's time to vote on ACB.
This is an important point. If you keep the floor open you have to police it. If Dems leave the floor for a minute, Rs can pass whatever they want by UC. Before we knew a sizeable chunk of the GOP conference had covid, that could be done safely. But... https://twitter.com/treeaston/status/1312937019694346240?s=20
...Now that we know covid is racing through their ranks, Dems face the gnarly choice of either being on the floor near Rs to force live quorums and block them from passing things by UC or keeping the floor open but letting Rs pass things. Better to lock in no votes for 2 wks.
To this point: I've advocated for Dems to force Rs off the trail. But the tactics have to serve the strategy. Post-multiple covid disagnoses, if Dems force live quorums etc, the press will understandably turn on them. Better to lock in no votes for 2 wks. https://twitter.com/_SunshineRising/status/1312949360464924673?s=20
