New York Times: Senate Confirms Nominees as G.O.P. Discontent Rises

[Unitedwestand13]

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/07/19/us/politics/senate-confirms-labor-secretary-nominee.html?_r=0

WASHINGTON — President Obama’s executive branch nominees continued to cruise through the Senate on Thursday, including his controversial pick to be labor secretary, Thomas E. Perez, as Republican anger over a deal to avoid a weakening of the filibuster seeped into the open.

The Senate, along strict party lines, 54-46, gave final confirmation to Mr. Perez, the Justice Department’s civil rights chief, as the president’s second labor secretary, then voted 59-40 to confirm his nominee to be the next Environmental Protection Agency administrator, Gina McCarthy, 154 days after the last E.P.A. head stepped down.

Behind closed doors and in the public halls of the Capitol, Republican senators expressed deep regret over a deal many now say gave them nothing. Mr. Obama will get seven nominees confirmed, including some strongly opposed by conservatives. He will resurrect the National Labor Relations Board, which many Republicans believe tilts labor disputes toward the unions, and will sidestep mounting pressure to increase oversight of the new Consumer Financial Protection Bureau.

In exchange, Republicans did not even get a promise that Democrats will not change the rules on executive branch nominees with a 51-vote strong-arm maneuver in the future.

“There wasn’t any deal. They got what they wanted. We basically rolled over,” said Senator Richard C. Shelby, Republican of Alabama. “What changed is the Democrats threatened to change the rules, and they got the agreement without changing the rules.”

“Senate Republicans preserved the right to surrender in the future,” Senator Ted Cruz, Republican of Texas, said on his Twitter feed.

It seems that the usual political stereotype of senate democrats lacking backbone does not apply in this case.

 

[Unitedwestand13]

some more from the article about the reaction to the confirmation Of Thomas Perez as labor secretary

To some conservatives, the Perez confirmation is already emerging as the most galling consequence of the filibuster deal, even though many Republicans said he would have gotten the 60 votes to break a filibuster regardless.

Conservative Republicans in the House have spent months accusing Mr. Perez of being overly partisan, antireligious, and litigious to a fault. The House Oversight and Government Reform Committee had outstanding subpoenas issued against Mr. Perez, demanding records on a deal he struck with the city of St. Paul to drop a lawsuit involving public housing conditions in what some Republicans called a quid pro quo.

Republicans involved in that investigation say they have been left high and dry.

“We lost, he won,” said Representative Jim Jordan, Republican of Ohio and a senior member of the committee.

Senator Mike Lee, Republican of Utah, echoed the concerns of many Republicans who have accused Mr. Perez of selecting cases based on political motivation and, in some instances, racial bias.

“Simply put, there’s no shortage of reasons why Mr. Perez should not be confirmed,” he said on the Senate floor.

Mr. Obama hailed the confirmation of Mr. Perez and others “who have waited far too long for the yes-or-no votes they deserve.”

“Tom has lived the American dream himself, and has dedicated his career to keeping it within reach for hard-working families across the country. At the Department of Labor, Tom will help us continue to grow our economy, help businesses create jobs, make sure workers have the skills those jobs require, and ensure safe workplaces and economic opportunity for all,” the president said.

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/07/19/us/politics/senate-confirms-labor-secretary-nominee.html?_r=0

 

[Unitedwestand13]

the last bit of the article

Mr. Perez’s opponents were not the only ones who believe the deal pulled the rug out from under them. Senator Rob Portman, Republican of Ohio, had been negotiating for three months, and until as recently as last week, to extract changes to the operation of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau in exchange for his support for confirming its first director, Richard Cordray.

Mr. Portman wanted a Senate-confirmed inspector general for the new agency, as well as a board of directors to monitor a strong director. Those talks, involving the White House chief of staff, Denis McDonough, and Treasury Secretary Jacob J. Lew, had made enough progress that Mr. Portman asked Mr. McCain to leave Mr. Cordray’s nomination out of a deal on executive-branch nominees, according to officials involved in the talks.

On Saturday, Mr. McCain told Mr. Portman he would get nothing.

“Everybody is still trying to figure out what this deal was,” said Senator John Thune of South Dakota, the Senate’s third-ranking Republican.

The deal is already proving shaky, regardless of any handshake compromise. Mr. McCain said Thursday said that he would place a hold on the nomination of Gen. Martin E. Dempsey to another two-year term as chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.

Asked how he could reconcile that decision with his role as the chief negotiator of the filibuster deal, he shot back: “What’s the connection? I have a responsibility to get answers.”

So it seems obama got his nominees confirmed, and the republicans got.... come to think about it they did not get much out of the deal at all.

but why is no one talking about this except me?

 

[American]

WTF do you want to hear? Just carry on your leftwing gloat thread, we'll watch.

 

[paddymcdougall]

Personally, I would have liked to see the rules changed, but glad Dems finally stood up to the pressure and got something for not changing them.

But doesn't mean we need to gloat or anything.

 

[Unitedwestand13]

WTF do you want to hear? Just carry on your leftwing gloat thread, we'll watch.

personally i want to hear something from the other side about what has happened related to the fillibuster deal that prevented Harry reid from changing the senate rules.

 

[Unitedwestand13]

Personally, I would have liked to see the rules changed, but glad Dems finally stood up to the pressure and got something for not changing them.

But doesn't mean we need to gloat or anything.

yeah i wish that the democrats could have brought up the talking filibuster as a idea.

 

[Deuce]

WTF do you want to hear? Just carry on your leftwing gloat thread, we'll watch.

I'll keep this in mind next time a right-wing circle-jerk thread comes up.

 

[sangha]

WTF do you want to hear? Just carry on your leftwing gloat thread, we'll watch.

It sucks to be a loser :boohoo:

 

[Drake McHugh]

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/07/19/us/politics/senate-confirms-labor-secretary-nominee.html?_r=0



It seems that the usual political stereotype of senate democrats lacking backbone does not apply in this case.

Who would ever say that? They have gotten almost everything they really want through. I mean,as a conservative,if the GOP had been as successful in implementing what I supported,I would be VERY happy. Just goes to show "liberals"a term I think is not really accurate,want total power.

 

[iguanaman]

WTF do you want to hear? Just carry on your leftwing gloat thread, we'll watch.

Allowing a President to choose those that work for him is nothing to gloat about. It's in the Constitution and this merely corrects a minority party that has been unwilling to follow it..