McConnell: Dems Intent on Packing Court - 'Don’t Want Any Meaningful Check On The President'

Halloween - Just Another Scary Day in D.C.

Today in Washington, D.C. - Oct. 31, 2013 - Rasmussen Reports: 37% Say Zombies Would Do Better Job Than Federal Gov't
The Senate reconvened at 10 AM today and began consideration of the nomination of Rep. Mel Watt (D-NC) to be director of the Federal Housing Finance Agency.

At noon, Senator-elect Corey Booker (D-NJ) was sworn in as the junior senator from New Jersey. Based on the past actions of Mr. Booker, the moral quality of the Senate will be diminished today. Constitutionally, New Jersey selected this man to represent their voice in the Senate. However, all of us will also suffer as a result.

Following the swearing-in, the Senate will vote on cloture (to cut off debate) on the Watt nomination.

On Monday, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) filed cloture on the nomination of Patricia Millett to be a judge on the DC Circuit Court of Appeals as part of Democrat attempts to pack the court with liberal judges. A cloture vote on her nomination could come as early as today.

Yesterday, the Senate voted 91-8 to invoke cloture on the nomination of Alan Estevez to be Principal Deputy Under Secretary of Defense and confirmed him by voice vote.

The Senate also voted 81-18 to invoke cloture on the nomination of Katherine Archuleta to be the director of the Office of Personnel Management and then voted 62-35 to confirm her.

The House is not in Session today. They will reconvened on Friday, Nov 1 at 10 AM.

Yesterday, the House passed:
H.R. 992 (292-122) — "To amend provisions in section 716 of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act relating to Federal assistance for swaps entities."
H.J. Res. 99 (222-191) — "Relating to the disapproval of the President's exercise of authority to suspend the debt limit, as submitted under section 1002(b) of the Continuing Appropriations Act, 2014 on October 17, 2013."

Yestday, Speaker John Boehner (R-OH) released the following statement in response to President Obama’s remarks on health care in Boston.“It’s beyond disappointing that, despite the evidence, the president continues to mislead the American people about his health care law. The president promised that if you like your health care plan, you can keep it. It wasn’t true when he said it years ago, and, as millions of Americans are finding out, it’s not true now. All across the country, cancellation notices are hitting mailboxes because of the train wreck that is the president’s health care law. Millions are being forced to buy new, Washington-approved plans, regardless of whether they liked their old plan or not and often at a higher cost. The President sold this law on a pack of lofty promises. But what he said simply wasn’t true. The American people deserve better.” Fox News’ Shannon Bream reports, “There is a battle brewing over President Obama's three nominees to fill open seats on the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals. The court is critical for a number of reasons, including the fact that it is the primary source of appeals related to federal agencies and their regulations. From the IRS to the EPA, the court is often charged with deciding just how far the powers of federal agencies do, or don't, reach. In addition, it's often seen as a stepping stone to the U.S. Supreme Court. Four of the current Justices served on the D.C. Circuit bench before being appointed to the nation's highest court. Nominees Patricia Millett and Cornelia Pillard passed through the Senate Judiciary Committee along party line votes, as is expected for the third nominee, U.S. District Judge Robert Wilkins. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., has signaled Millett's nomination could be put to a vote in the full Senate . . . . The current make-up of the court is equally divided between appointees from Republican and Democratic presidents, and several Democrats have publicly expressed their desire to tilt the balance by making sure the president's nominees make it to the bench.”

Majority Leader Reid may hold a cloture vote to attempt to move the first liberal nominee, Patricia Millett, as early as this afternoon.

In a post for NRO’s Corner yesterday, Senate Republican Whip John Cornyn explained more about what’s going on: “It is one of the most important battles raging in Washington, a fight that will have far-reaching consequences for everything from health care and the regulatory state to gun rights and the war on terrorism. Yet most Americans have heard nothing about it. I’m talking about Democratic efforts to pack the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit. . . . The D.C. Circuit currently has eight active judges and six senior judges (who are semi-retired). Based on its caseload, the court does not need more judges at the present time. For example: Between 2005 and 2013, its total number of written decisions per active judge declined by 27 percent, and the number of appeals filed with the court fell by 18 percent. The D.C. Circuit has already taken four months off this year. Meanwhile, other federal appellate courts genuinely are overburdened and do need more judges. And yet, instead of trying to fill judicial vacancies where the need is most urgent, President Obama and Senate Democrats are attempting to transform the D.C. Circuit into a rubber stamp for liberalism and big government. . . . Their motivation is simple enough: In recent years, the D.C. Circuit has repeatedly pushed back against executive overreach. In 2011, it struck down the Securities and Exchange Commission’s ‘proxy access’ rule, declaring that the agency failed to conduct a proper cost-benefit analysis before adopting the regulation. Last year, the court vacated the Environmental Protection Agency’s Cross-State Air Pollution Rule, noting that it would ‘impose massive emissions reduction requirements’ on certain states ‘without regard to the limits imposed by the statutory text.’ The D.C. Circuit has also rejected as unconstitutional a pair of appointments that President Obama made to the National Labor Relations Board in January 2012, ruling that the administration’s legal rationale for these appointments would ‘eviscerate the Constitution’s separation of powers.’ . . . Unfortunately, top Democrats are now smearing the D.C. Circuit judges and vowing to do whatever it takes to shift the court in a more liberal direction. ‘They’ve done a lot of bad things,’ Senator majority leader Harry Reid said in August, ‘so we’re focusing very intently on the D.C. Circuit. We need at least one more [judge]. There’s three vacancies, we need at least one more and that will switch the majority.’”

Speaking on the Senate floor this morning, Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell added, “What’s behind this push to fill seats on a court that is cancelling oral argument days for a lack of cases and which, according to the judges who serve on it, won’t have enough work to go around if we do?  Well, we don’t have to guess.  Our Democratic colleagues and the Administration’s supporters have been fairly candid about it. They have admitted they want to control the court so it will advance the President’s agenda.  As one Administration ally put it, ‘the president’s best hope for advancing his agenda is through executive action, and that runs through the D. C. Circuit.’ Let me repeat, the reason they want to put more judges on the D.C. Circuit is not because it needs them, but because ‘the president’s best hope for advancing his agenda is through executive action, and that runs through the D.C. Circuit.’ . . . [I]t’s not that the court has been more unfavorable to President Obama than it was to President Bush.  Rather, the Administration and its allies seem to be complaining that the court hasn’t been favorable enough to it. Evidently, they don’t want any meaningful check on the President.  You see, there is one in the House of Representatives, but the Administration can circumvent that with aggressive agency rulemaking.  That is, if the D.C. Circuit allows it to do so. Mr. President, a court should not be a rubberstamp for any administration.  And our Democratic colleagues told us again and again during the Bush Administration that the Senate confirmation process should not be a rubberstamp for any administration either.  For example, they said President Bush’s nomination of Miguel Estrada to the D.C. Circuit was ‘an effort to pack the Federal courts.’ And they filibustered his nomination—seven times, in fact.”

Leader McConnell also reminded Democrats of the rationale they used to block one of President Bush’s nominees. “Ms. Millett is no doubt a fine person,” he said. “This is nothing personal. Peter Keisler, of course, is a fine person, too. But our Democratic colleagues pocket-filibustered his nomination to the D.C. Circuit for two years on the ground that the court’s workload did not warrant his confirmation. They did so despite his considerable skill as an attorney, and his personal qualities. His nomination languished until the end of the Bush Administration; he waited almost 1,000 days for a vote that never came. The criteria our Democratic friends cited to block Mr. Keisler’s nomination then, clearly show that the court is even less busy now. . . . In writing then-Judiciary Committee Chairman Arlen Specter to oppose the nomination of Peter Keisler, Senate Democrats said ‘Mr. Keisler should under no circumstances be considered—much less confirmed . . . before we first address the very need for that judgeship . . . and deal with the genuine judicial emergencies identified by the Judicial Conference.’ That course of action ought to be followed here, too. Senator Grassley has legislation that will allow the President to fill seats on courts that need judges.  The Senate should support that legislation, not transparent efforts to politicize a court that doesn’t need judges in an effort to create a rubberstamp for the Administration’s agenda.”

---

Tags: IWashington, D.C., halloween, democrats, packing the court, To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. Thanks!