The Senate rules, as written, work only when there is a general environment of collegiality.
In other words, they don’t work in 2023 (and many years previous).
Tuberville’s military blockade shows that it is time to blow up the Senate rules via the nuclear option.
Here is what I suggest:
-
For all military nominations, Executive Branch nominations to Executive Schedule Levels 3, 4, 5, United States District Judge nominations, United States Trade Court nominations and nominations to Article I & IV Courts, it would require 20 Senators to place a hold, equal to the Constitutional 1/5th of the Senate required to force a recorded vote. It would require the objection of 20 Senators on the floor of the Senate to block a consent request, in which case, a cloture vote and final recorded vote would be necessary. If 1 to 19 Senators objected on the floor, the consent request would turn into a voice vote on confirmation.
-
For all Executive Branch nominations to Executive Schedule Levels 1 & 2 (Cabinet Secretaries and Directors of Independent Agencies), nominations to the United States Court of Appeals and nominations to the United States Supreme Court, a single Senator would still be able to place a hold or block a consent request on the Senate floor.
-
I would abolish post cloture debate time for all nominations. I would also eliminate the two legislative day “ripening” period for cloture motions and allow them to be voted on as soon as they are presented on the Senate floor.
-
For nominations described in Section 1 above, they would go straight to the Senate floor upon receipt from the President and would be entitled to a final vote on confirmation on the first legislative day following the elapse of 30 calendar days after receipt from the President. On the demand of 40 Senators, the nomination would be referred to committee for hearing, such hearing to be held with 30 calendar days of receipt of the nomination from the President. Final confirmation vote would occur on the first legislative day following the elapse of 30 calendar days from the last day of the hearing.
-
For nominations described in Section 2 above, they would go automatically to committee and would be on the same time frame as nominations referred to committee in Section 4.
-
I would eliminate the requirement for a committee vote. After hearings are complete, the nomination would automatically go to the floor of the Senate. I would eliminate the holdover period in committee.
-
I would adopt an electronic voting system for the Senate and strict voting periods, similar to the House of Representatives, perhaps 15 minutes for the first vote in a series and 5 minutes thereafter.
The idea would be to create a 60 day maximum period for the confirmation of nominations, but also to make it far easier to confirm nominations faster.
It would also make it impossible for either the MAJORITY or MINORITY to block a final vote on a nomination. Every nomination would get an up or down vote unless it came after about the last week of October of an election year, in which case the Senate might adjourn before the 30 or 60 days ran out.
I would go farther and reform military nominations. Currently 0-1 through O-3 is appointed by the President alone and O-4 and above is appointed by the President with the advice and consent of the Senate. I would change that so that O-1 through O-6 is appointed by the President alone and O-7 through O-10 (Generals and Admirals) are appointed by the President with the advice and consent of the Senate.
I would also eliminate the requirement for members of the Career Senior Foreign Service to obtain the advice and consent of the Senate for posting to a particular country, only for promotion within the Senior Foreign Service. Patronage nominations would still require advice and consent.
Both sides have been abusive for years, but Tuberville has taken it to an obscene new plateau, depriving the Marine Corps of a Commandant.
No single Senator should have anywhere near that level of personal power.
Time to blow up those Senate rules.
And for those who will give the standard knee jerk partisan objection, this would likely HELP Trump a great deal if he is elected in 2024. Of course, it would benefit Presidents of either party and on an equal basis. There are no partisan winners or losers with this over the long term.
