John Thune on Trump Nominees: Dems are ‘delaying, obstructing, blocking at every point’
“This is the first president in history who has never had, at this point in his presidency, a civilian nominee approved either by unanimous consent or voice vote in the Senate.”
Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-SD) joined Brian Kilmeade on Fox Radio Monday to discuss the Democrats’ “unprecedented” obstruction of President Donald Trump’s civilian nominees. He said:
This is unprecedented, what they’re doing. This is the first president in history who has never had, at this point in his presidency, a civilian nominee approved either by unanimous consent or voice vote in the Senate, which is a way of expediting nominees that you know are broadly supported. So, they [Democrats] are delaying, obstructing, blocking, at every point in the process. So I totally appreciate the President’s frustration with what’s happening on the nominee front.
Kilmeade noted that, of the 259 positions requiring confirmation, only 97 have been filled—well below the number confirmed at this point in the Obama administration. [Note: Kilmeade’s statistics did not include the nominees that were confirmed last week – the total is now 107.]
Thune pointed out that, slow as the process may seem, “we’re at about double the rate of [this same time in] 2017.” The difference, he said, is that in 2017, “going into the August recess, the Democrats agreed to process a bunch of nominees in agreement with Republicans. So far, they haven’t indicated any desire to do that.”
While Democrats strongly oppose the confirmations of nominees Jeanine Pirro, Emil Bove, Mike Waltz, and Paul Ingrassia, they are slow walking the confirmations of “many other less controversial figures,” according to Fox.
Republicans are trying to hammer out a deal with Democrats to see that more low-hanging fruit nominees, like ambassadors, get the green light for a faster process on the Senate floor, and are willing to keep lawmakers in town over the weekend if their counterparts don’t relent.
Veteran journalist and senior congressional analyst at The Washington Stand Mark Tapscott explained that Democratic senators, led by Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY), are “opposing unanimous consent on every Trump nominee that [Thune] brings to the floor.”
According to Tapscott:
Traditionally, non-controversial presidential nominations are waved through with a unanimous consent motion, but that isn’t happening in the 119th Congress. Democrats are using every parliamentary tactic possible to delay the confirmations, including withholding their consent whenever a unanimous motion is offered.
That stops the nomination in its tracks and throws multiple wrenches into the legislative process.
Because Democrats are forcing debate and roll-call votes on all nominees — rather than just on those on which there are genuine issues — the legislative process is being hampered just when the government could face another shutdown crisis when Congress returns in September after the Labor Day holiday.
Tapscott cites remarks from a July 24 floor speech from Senate Majority Whip John Barrasso (R-WY) who told colleagues that it “took relentless procedural battles” to confirm the first 107 nominees. “It included full days and long nights. Why? Because Democrats are waging a coordinated campaign of obstruction.”
Barrasso accused the Democrats of turning the Senate’s advice and consent role relating to confirmations into “into automatic opposition. It doesn’t just delay President Trump. It damages the country,” he said.
Barrasso added:
Democrats have filibustered all but one of President Trump’s nominees, and that was the very first nominee — now-Secretary of State Marco Rubio. He was confirmed on day one of this administration. Since then, it has been a wall of obstruction. Democrats filibustered positions requiring confirmation that have never before had a roll call vote in the United States Senate.
As the minority party, Democrats view obstruction as their only leverage. But have they lost sight of the fact that Republicans can—and likely will—do the same when the roles are reversed?
Recall then–Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid’s insistence upon invoking the “nuclear option” to eliminate the filibuster (the 60-vote threshold) for most presidential nominations, including federal judges (but excluding Supreme Court nominees), in 2013.
Then in 2017, when the GOP held the majority, Mitch McConnell extended the nuclear option to include Supreme Court nominees. This allowed Neil Gorsuch, Brett Kavanaugh, and Amy Coney Barrett to be confirmed with simple majorities, reshaping the Court’s ideological balance.
Here are some excerpts from Thune’s recent interview with The Daily Caller:
Historically, there’s always been an effort on the sides to kind of figure out ways to work together and put people in positions, and they’re important positions that need to be filled, but the Dems are just completely obstructing.
…
No president in history has gotten to this point in their presidency and not had a nominee confirmed by unanimous consent or voice vote.
…
If they set this as a new precedent, whenever they get the White House again and have the Senate again, it’s going to get really ugly.
Still, Thune is determined to get the job done. As he told Kilmeade, “We’re just gonna grind it out and wear ’em [Senate Democrats] down.”
Elizabeth writes commentary for Legal Insurrection and The Washington Examiner. She is an academy fellow at The Heritage Foundation. Please follow Elizabeth on X or LinkedIn.
DONATE
Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.
Comments
The answer is simple; Sack up and use the rules and precedents to mitigate it. Start by keeping the Senate operating on a 24/7 basis, no breaks just open for business. Use tactical quorum calls to pull the geezers to the Senate Chambers. Ignore ‘blue slips’ from d/prog until they act with more collegiality. Demand speaking filibusters. Use committee chairman to coordinate 24/7 committee meetings. If the d/prog want to play procedural games no problem….but the Majority gets to choose most of the games being played and should stack the deck in their favor.
Or just recess for 10, 20, 30, 60, or 90 days and let Trump use recess appointments.
Then the voters can decide in 2026 if they want to give a veto proof majority to Republicans.
I think you’re correct. So why don’t the Republicans do what you suggest?
Because they have no spine.
Invertebrates, pathetic.
gibbie,
You did note they’d need to sack up first? That requirement renders many DC establishment uniparty squishy Senators unable to comply. They become too unwilling to rock the boat and risk not being invited to DC cocktail parties, have their media buddies take them to task or get called names.
Much easier to enjoy the prerogatives of office, coast along until the election cycle then make a couple show votes for the folks back home; more DoD spending or VA facility expansion are popular, maybe a couple toothless resolutions and a bunch of ‘we’ll get it done next time’ rhetoric about deficits, bloated bureaucracy, regulatory overreach. Lots of these types from deep red +5 States Cornyn TX, Graham SC, Lankford OK to name three. Yet the voters keep sending them back to DC to fail again.
You mean play to win? Republicans?
There are a few willing to play hardball and oppose the uniparty that stood back and/or assisted in open borders, shifting domestic manufacturing overseas, enacting Cray Cray regulations and spending like drunken sailors. Unfortunately they are rare and stick up among the rest who bury their heads in the sand. They get hammered for not being willing to play the ‘go along/get along’ DC games. See Rep Massie.
The lesson to this GOPe is to do the same when Dems are in power. Tit for tat is a winning game theory strategy.
Now do your job Thune and get them confirmed before the mid terms Thune.
Exactly what I was going to say …
I don’t remember the Republicans putting up a fight to Democrat nominees that were far more radical
Also … can we say “recess appointment?” … Thune is full of crap and ducks this whole issue and tries to pin it all on Democrats when he is just as responsible for obstruction here.
Thune makes these comments on Kilmeade’s show knowing full well that a lightweight like Kilmeade won’t press him on recess appointments. For those that don’t know, our ‘conservative’ House and Senate GOP leaders have kept Congress in pro forma sessions during their breaks precisely to keep Trump from making recess appointments, something Pelosi & Reid NEVER did when they were in charge during Obama’s tenure.
True. At some point the use of recess appointments must be not just considered but utilized. I’d suggest that they use the normal Aug break, go to official recess in both HoR and Senate. Trump puts his nominees into place and they come back to work on the budget after labor day.
The House doesn’t have to be in recess, it just has to consent to the senate being in one.
True though it does put all of Congress back into their CD/State or a least the opportunity to do so without any pressure/potential of recall. The more time out of DC and directly in front of constituents the better.
To paraphrase Pogo: If I could write, I’d write my senators, if they could read.
Why?
Is there some legitimate reason?
Is it because our ‘conservative’ House and Senate GOP leaders don’t think they can get enough votes to confirm President Trump’s nominees?
Is it because they want to preserve the “congeniality of the Senate”?
Is it because they are self-important jerks?
Is it because they want to sabotage Trump?
We will never know. We have negligible effect.
Repeal the 17th Amendment.
I don’t think this is true, although I can’t find any information about it on a brief web search. Certainly in 0bama’s last six years pro forma sessions were held routinely, as they had been during Bush’s last few years.
The only time it was even possible for Pelosi and Reid to engineer a recess for the sake of allowing 0bama to make an appointment was in his first two years. And for much of that time the Dems had a filibuster-proof majority in the senate, so 0bama had no need for recess appointments. Even when they were down to only 59 senators, that was enough to ensure that 0bama’s nominations never had significant trouble getting through, so there was no need for a recess. But I can’t find any information on whether the senate held pro forma sessions during those two years.
Them darn democrats. The GOP has only a 6 seat majority in the senate, so they can’t get anything done. Them darn democrats.
I’ve heard variations of this my whole adult life:
We only have one-half of one-third of the govt., so we can’t get anything done.
We only have one-third of the govt., so we can’t get anything done. Them darn democrats.
We only have two-thirds of the govt., but the courts are hostile, so we can’t get anything done.
We only have three-thirds of the govt. with favorable courts, but our majority is razor thin, so we can’t get anything done. Them darn democrats.
Six. Seat. Majority. Thune. SIX. I’m so sick of these weasels.
why does the gop persist in allowing the dems to do it their way but wont make the moves when they have the power!!
Petty games played by petty people, both sides do it. We can clearly see what the priorities are, vacation and fund raising is more important than an executive and judicial branch with confirmed appointments,
Don’t forget that Tuberville blocked some 400 military promotions over a single issue for about 10 months.
For the record, that had ZERO impact on the operational readiness of the military. Why? Frocking. There was not a single billet that went unfilled because of the practice of frocking. The ‘held’ officers performed the function of their pending billet and were even allowed to wear the rank insignia (in most branches of service). But wait, there’s more. Not only were all those officers frocked, but the Senate then approved BACKPAY for those who had their promotions held.
The other important distinction between what Tuberville did and and what Dems are doing is Tuberville’s action did NOTHING to materially or adversely impact Joe Biden’s control of the military because of this thing known as the Chain-of-Command. He had his SecDef and that’s all he needed. Democrats are materially impeding Trump by forcing him to continue to use Biden holdovers to implement policy.
It was a very important issue, which the government could have resolved at any time but refused to.
The government showed its priorities; killing babies was more important to it than getting these promotions through. If the promotions weren’t that important to the government why should they have been more important to him?
What a surprise: sh*tlibs throwing tantrums when they don’t get their way.
Doing what Communists do.
Yeah, Thune, Democrats are the ones taking a month off while at the same time declaring themselves ‘in session’ so Trump can’t recess appoint everybody.
Nobody is buying this crap. Either do the work, or ACTUALLY recess. Nobody’s buying this RINO crap of PRETENDING to want to work.
Hey Republicans in the Senate and the House. Get off your lazy asses and get to work for us! I work 12 hour shifts that rotate from days to nights every couple weeks. I can walk up 5-8 miles a shift. Your job isn’t that hard.
Republicans hold the majority in the Senate. Sometimes you have to wield your power. LBJ was not above whipping out “Jumbo” to punctuate the point that he was the alpha in whatever discussion he was having. ‘Bout time Thune showed, metaphorically or physically, some balls.
Keep the Senate in session until doomsday if needed. You want to go home then put the nominees up for vote.
Thune needs to grow some balls and declare that the Senate will stay in session 24/7 until every US Attorney and ambassador is confirmed.
This kind of delay worked well in the first days of the Bush administration. By worked well I meant the USA was attacked by Democrat allies on 9/11
I suggest that Thune has the Senate and Johnson does the same with the House that all go home for 3 months making a recess in Congress. President Trump then does recess appointments while nobody is in Congress.
The House doesn’t have to be in recess. Only the senate does, but it needs the House’s permission.
D’s started with the nonsense of insisting on the full 30 hours of “debate” for EVERY nominee at the start of Trump’s first term. Neither Party had ever done that before. They never actually debate at all, of course. They just insist on waiting out the full time for each nominee – and in addition impose additional delays by abusing every rule they can think of.
R’s can, and really should have already, simply changed the rules. Which they can do by simple majority vote.
Keep the 30 hours for Cabinet officials and SCOTUS Justices. Drop it to 10 hours for Appellate court judges and under-secretaries. Make it 3 hours for district court judges and other bureaucrat appointees.
And, for the vast majority of bureaucrat appointees – simply change their job classification and eliminate the need for Senate confirmation entirely. There’s a huge mass of low level appointees that really never needed Senate confirmation.
As suggested above, another thing that can/should be done in addition to the above is for Trump & Thune to agree on which nominees the Senate majority would support him making recess appointments on, and which not, and then declare an official recess for long enough to allow Trump to do it. Any nominee that’s been delayed more than 30 days and is not up for a lifetime appointment would be a good start. If the Senate Majority has an issue with any specific nominee, let the President know in advance and get his word that he won’t recess appoint him/her.
They have the power to put an end to the D’s obstruction. What they lack is spine.
You can’t just turn a principal officer into an inferior officer by saying so. That’s what Garland tried with Jack Smith; call him an inferior officer so he doesn’t need the senate’s consent. But Seth Tillman came up with the theory that there’s an inherent difference between principal and inferior officers, which is that inferior officers can’t make independent decisions and can only operate under the supervision of a principal officer to whose appointment the senate consented. Smith was functioning as a principal officer, not reporting to anyone but Garland, and making most decisions on his own, so his appointment needed the senate’s consent. And it appeared that the courts were agreeing with Tillman, which threw a permanent wrench in Smith’s works.
At any rate, Trump and the GOP adopted this theory enthusiastically, so they can’t now turn around and ignore it by appointing people to senior positions that involve independent decision-making power, and yet calling them “inferior” so they won’t need confirmation.