Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Dear Senator Dianne Feinstein: This is not about you. [View all]Ms. Toad
(34,126 posts)72. There have beeen 25 judiciary committee votes during her absence.
According to Newsweek, all 25 votes were for nominees.
If that is accurate (that all 25 were for nominees) 24 have been held back because of her absence. Only one nomimee has moved out of the judiciary committee since her absence began. That nominee had Republican support, and was able to overcome the tie vote.
Axios
So it appears that the logjam is not that there are nominees to be spit out, it is that there are not nominees with Republican support.
Without Republican support, in the face of Feinstein's absence, votes are either not being taken - or they are going down 10-10.
I was suspicious that most of the articles only referenced how many votes she had missed, not whether Feinstein's absence altered the outcome of any of those votes. So I spent some time looking. From the Newsweek article (25 were for judicial nominees) and Axios (only one nominee has been voted out of committee since the start of her absence) it does appear that there is a serious slow-down in the work of the judiciary committee in the absence of an 11th Democratic vote.)
For the sake of full disclosure, I do believe she should retire. BUT - I hate playing fast and loose with the facts. That is why I went I went looking to see what the facts actually are. At least as to the judiciary committee, the representation that her absence is having a significant impact appears to be accurate, not just in # of votes missed, but as to the outcome of those votes. I have not yet tracked down whether her absence made any difference in any of the other 30-ish votes.
If that is accurate (that all 25 were for nominees) 24 have been held back because of her absence. Only one nomimee has moved out of the judiciary committee since her absence began. That nominee had Republican support, and was able to overcome the tie vote.
Axios
So it appears that the logjam is not that there are nominees to be spit out, it is that there are not nominees with Republican support.
Without Republican support, in the face of Feinstein's absence, votes are either not being taken - or they are going down 10-10.
I was suspicious that most of the articles only referenced how many votes she had missed, not whether Feinstein's absence altered the outcome of any of those votes. So I spent some time looking. From the Newsweek article (25 were for judicial nominees) and Axios (only one nominee has been voted out of committee since the start of her absence) it does appear that there is a serious slow-down in the work of the judiciary committee in the absence of an 11th Democratic vote.)
For the sake of full disclosure, I do believe she should retire. BUT - I hate playing fast and loose with the facts. That is why I went I went looking to see what the facts actually are. At least as to the judiciary committee, the representation that her absence is having a significant impact appears to be accurate, not just in # of votes missed, but as to the outcome of those votes. I have not yet tracked down whether her absence made any difference in any of the other 30-ish votes.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
116 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
I will tell you what we are paying for, those self-identifed progressives who refused to vote for
JohnSJ
Apr 2023
#18
Really? The SC was at stake. Which part of that didn't those stupid voters understand? In every
JohnSJ
Apr 2023
#90
The US is facing one of the most serious times in our history. We need all hands onboard.
Irish_Dem
Apr 2023
#4
I think those reports, like the overwrought reports about Feinstein (and McConnell)
onenote
Apr 2023
#114
So as far as you're concerned, she's totally sane, right in the head, and
NotVeryImportant
Apr 2023
#115
So far as I'm concerned, apart from being unable to participate after she got shingles,
onenote
Apr 2023
#116
This is totally what it's about. There could have been respectful conversations with
Nixie
Apr 2023
#15
Thanks to you also for your very informative posts and exposing the distortions that
Nixie
Apr 2023
#27
Your posts have been so incredibly informative and completely expose the disinformation
Nixie
Apr 2023
#26
Thanks again for your factual posts that counter the hyperbolic ridiculousness DU is so prone to.
emulatorloo
Apr 2023
#67
You're absolutely right. These kinds of threads are not only reasonable discussion,
FoxNewsSucks
Apr 2023
#45
"Of the 58 votes Feinstein has missed while ill, 25 were for judicial nominees..."
SunSeeker
Apr 2023
#50
how is so pressing when there are still nominees waiting for votes from the full Senate?
bigtree
Apr 2023
#73
Give me one example of a judicial nominee who hasn't been confirmed because of Feinstein's absence?
onenote
Apr 2023
#16
Thank-you. In addition, she will be back soon. She has also instructed Schumer is she is needed on
JohnSJ
Apr 2023
#21
Good. And that needs to keep up, or even increase. NOT come to a standstill.
FoxNewsSucks
Apr 2023
#48
Then shouldn't pressure be put on Schumer to bring the 18 pending nominations to the floor?
onenote
Apr 2023
#57
Whether she resigns or just leaves the judiciary committee, we're still screwed
Fiendish Thingy
Apr 2023
#34
Same here. And said he did a "masterful job" on that hearing while hugging him.
FoxNewsSucks
Apr 2023
#49
Cyrano said perfectly what I have been thinking. Nicely done. I just want to add that a significant
flashman13
Apr 2023
#38
Just a guess, but some of the same folks declaring Feinstein incapable of recovering
onenote
Apr 2023
#105