Skip to main content

View Diary: The clear way forward on filibuster reform: The constitutional option (105 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Advice & Consent - Making it work (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Simplify

    I put this comment in another diary in December.  I am recycling it here:



    Qui Tacet Consentire

    While I agree that filibusters should require the filly or buster to stand on his or her hind legs and hold the floor, I believe Senate confirmation of presidential appointments requires a different rule.

    The Senate responsibility to advise and consent on appointments does not, in my view, give them the right to stop the process completely.  They can vote yes or no (uppordown vote), but I think if they take no action at all for some period, the nominee should be confirmed.

    This should work similarly to the rules for Presidential vetoes.  Provided that the Congress is in session, the President has ten working days to "return" the bill, meaning he must either sign it or veto it.  If he does neither, he is deemed to have consented.

    Article I, Section 7 of the Constitution says:

    If any Bill shall not be returned by the President within ten days (Sundays excepted) after it shall have been presented to him, the same shall be a Law, in like manner as if he had signed it, unless the Congress by their Adjournment prevent its return, in which case it shall not be a Law.

    Let the same rule apply to Presidential appointments.  The Senate should have ten working days after a nominee is presented by the President to confirm or reject the nomination, and if they do neither, that is, if they don't have the uppordown vote in that time, then the nominee should be confirmed.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site