PDA

View Full Version : Official Thread - Senate Vote on Audit the Fed 1/12/16




tsai3904
01-12-2016, 09:06 AM
Rand is expected to speak on the Senate floor at 2:15 pm ET.

At 2:30 pm, the Senate will vote on S. 2232, the Federal Reserve Transparency Act. It will be a procedural vote requiring 60 votes (motion to invoke cloture on the motion to proceed).

C-SPAN2 live stream:
http://www.c-span.org/networks/?channel=c-span-2

Senate live stream:
http://floor.senate.gov/MediaPlayer.php?view_id=2&event_id=632

Update: The vote failed 53-44 (60 votes needed). Here's the roll call vote: http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=114&session=2&vote=00002

tsai3904
01-12-2016, 09:10 AM
Some important Senators announced they will vote for the bill:

Alabama Senator Richard Shelby, Chairman of the Senate Banking Committee, had been opposed to the bill and did not allow it to be heard in his committee. He will vote for the bill today:
686657902896115712
Senator Bernie Sanders will vote for the bill:
686654859517554690

The US Chamber of Commerce, Janet Yellen, and Ben Bernanke announced their opposition yesterday:
686706380951130112
686925538322198530
686549769779556353

A former Ron Paul aide refutes Bernanke's article:
686673513785241602

Some background information on the bill:
686634579420143618
686682925400756224
686681885947346945

TomtheTinker
01-12-2016, 09:14 AM
What's the chance this passed?

Origanalist
01-12-2016, 09:15 AM
686925538322198530

tsai3904
01-12-2016, 09:26 AM
What's the chance this passed?

I'd give it probably 1/3 chance. There's 54 total Republicans and 6 Democrats who support the bill. If we can get all 54 Republicans to vote for the bill, it passes.

There are several Republicans who oppose the bill. The good thing is that this is a procedural vote and not a vote on final passage, which only requires majority vote. Alabama Senator Richard Shelby said he opposes the bill but is willing to vote for the procedural motion. Both Tennessee Senators oppose the bill but we'll see how they vote on the procedural motion.

There are also many vulnerable Democrats (those in red states or have tough re-election races) who might vote for the bill for political reasons.

Matt Collins
01-12-2016, 09:29 AM
686925538322198530




Didn't see that one coming! /sarc

squirl22
01-12-2016, 10:43 AM
I called my Senators; Burr is a co-sponsor and the person in Tillis' office just took the message and did not know his position, so he says.

tsai3904
01-12-2016, 10:48 AM
686946609041661952
686949078228463616
686947136194347009
686950625939185664
686951551148146688

tsai3904
01-12-2016, 10:50 AM
Is this true Ohio?
686951824130207744
Here's Senator Sherrod Brown's DC office number: 202-224-2315

Patrick Henry
01-12-2016, 10:59 AM
Will Rubio and Cruz find the time to make the vote?

ds21089
01-12-2016, 11:02 AM
Rand should go around telling everyone, "look at who votes no on this bill. These people without a doubt are corrupt and you should make sure they aren't re-elected." Maybe that will scare a few of them into voting for it ;)

tsai3904
01-12-2016, 11:05 AM
Will Rubio and Cruz find the time to make the vote?

Rubio is expected to vote. Cruz will be campaigning later tonight so people are unsure if he'll be on the floor to vote. Can anyone in Texas call his office (202-224-5922) and confirm?

Update: Cruz has a campaign event in NH at 1 pm. I don't think he'll make it back in time unless the vote is close and McConnell holds the vote open.

tsai3904
01-12-2016, 11:07 AM
686957127840198657

The Gold Standard
01-12-2016, 11:24 AM
LOL. So Cruz and Sanders already have their excuses lined up. Their owners will be pleased.

ds21089
01-12-2016, 11:36 AM
LOL. So Cruz and Sanders already have their excuses lined up. Their owners will be pleased.

We are definitely for the audit!..but well unfortunately we just cant make it *sniff*...

To that I say:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=huQoOuD0-f4

luctor-et-emergo
01-12-2016, 11:44 AM
Rubio is expected to vote. Cruz will be campaigning later tonight so people are unsure if he'll be on the floor to vote. Can anyone in Texas call his office (202-224-5922) and confirm?

Update: Cruz has a campaign event in NH at 1 pm. I don't think he'll make it back in time unless the vote is close and McConnell holds the vote open.

Well I hope it passes but if it doesn't because Cruz was doing something else... Damn. That's Ad-worthy.

Oh and FK C-SPAN for locking out foreigners and people who don't have cable.

tsai3904
01-12-2016, 11:48 AM
Oh and FK C-SPAN for locking out foreigners and people who don't have cable.

Here's another stream:
http://floor.senate.gov/MediaPlayer.php?view_id=2&event_id=632

PCKY
01-12-2016, 11:52 AM
Rubio is expected to vote. Cruz will be campaigning later tonight so people are unsure if he'll be on the floor to vote. Can anyone in Texas call his office (202-224-5922 (tel:202-224-5922)) and confirm?

Update: Cruz has a campaign event in NH at 1 pm. I don't think he'll make it back in time unless the vote is close and McConnell holds the vote open.
So his commitment to getting Ron Paul supporters is a little "squishy" then.

65fastback2+2
01-12-2016, 12:04 PM
https://twitter.com/randpaulmemes/status/686971902313680896

PCKY
01-12-2016, 12:38 PM
686957127840198657
At least Sanders is trying....

afwjam
01-12-2016, 01:02 PM
I'm trying to call every senator today, about half way through. Join me.

ds21089
01-12-2016, 01:02 PM
At least Sanders is trying....

I wouldn't be so sure about that. I'm willing to bet the flight "gets delayed".

statist slayer
01-12-2016, 01:04 PM
Everyone on FB needs to get their ass over to Ted Cruz's page to chastise him for missing this vote.

Brian4Liberty
01-12-2016, 01:15 PM
Well I hope it passes but if it doesn't because Cruz was doing something else... Damn. That's Ad-worthy.

It will be if that's the case.


So his commitment to getting Ron Paul supporters is a little "squishy" then.

It should sink him with Ron Paul supporters. Cruz payed lip service to Audit the Fed right from the start, and it's what got him the endorsement of Ron and Rand when he ran for Senate. This is the ultimate, two-faced betrayal (if he misses this key vote).

tommyrp12
01-12-2016, 01:16 PM
Rand is up there speaking now!

libertyplz
01-12-2016, 01:17 PM
Rand is speaking on this stream now : http://floor.senate.gov/MediaPlayer....2&event_id=632

Not sure how long he has been talking, was already speaking by time I clicked it

Brian4Liberty
01-12-2016, 01:17 PM
Rand speaking right now on CSPAN...

phill4paul
01-12-2016, 01:21 PM
686957127840198657


assuming his flight to DC gets in on time.

He must be a Rubio type representative.

dusman
01-12-2016, 01:24 PM
Unanimous call for 5 minutes longer for Rand. Senator from Ohio planning to speak, likely in opposition?

Edit: To oppose

r3volution 3.0
01-12-2016, 01:25 PM
Everyone on FB needs to get their ass over to Ted Cruz's page to chastise him for missing this vote.

This

(Sanders too)

robskicks
01-12-2016, 01:28 PM
Link shows 404 page not found, go here: http://www.senate.gov/floor/

eleganz
01-12-2016, 01:28 PM
Jesus Christ, Sherrod Brown's hair...and they say Rand's hair is bad?

robskicks
01-12-2016, 01:33 PM
What's happening with the reading of the names currently happening?

dusman
01-12-2016, 01:38 PM
Wow, only 13 for YEA so far. Ugh, I'm going for a walk.

dusman
01-12-2016, 01:40 PM
Rubio voted YEA, lol. ;)

Should get him a medal just for showing up.

ds21089
01-12-2016, 01:40 PM
Yeah screw this. This country is going to shit.

grayfoxjls
01-12-2016, 01:41 PM
What's happening with the reading of the names currently happening?


Rubio voted YEA, lol. ;)

Should get him a medal just for showing up.

Can't believe he showed for work...

garyallen59
01-12-2016, 01:42 PM
Graham voted Aye. That's wild.

r3volution 3.0
01-12-2016, 01:43 PM
Graham voted Aye. That's wild.

That means it's not going to pass.

grayfoxjls
01-12-2016, 01:43 PM
20 Y / 32 N

Not looking too hot...

65fastback2+2
01-12-2016, 01:44 PM
so sanders is absent....well there goes his entire campaign

Tunink
01-12-2016, 01:44 PM
So what happens if we don't get 60?

tommyrp12
01-12-2016, 01:45 PM
Edit 40/Yes 39/No

The Gold Standard
01-12-2016, 01:46 PM
So what happens if we don't get 60?

Nothing. They go back to their hookers and blow on our dime.

Jamesiv1
01-12-2016, 01:46 PM
Somebody correct me if I'm wrong, but right now it looks like they are voting on a motion to invoke cloture - which I think simply means to end debate.

If it passes, then they proceed to vote on the bill.

phill4paul
01-12-2016, 01:46 PM
Half way there.

65fastback2+2
01-12-2016, 01:46 PM
bunch of aye's rolling in

robertwerden
01-12-2016, 01:48 PM
fuck

Zippyjuan
01-12-2016, 01:48 PM
Voting on cloture (ending debate on the issue)- not on the bill yet.


Cloture — a process for limiting debate on a measure — is the Senate's only weapon against the filibuster. The details have changed several times since its creation a century ago, but here's the rule as it stands today: cloture is invoked when three-fifths of all sworn-in senators vote for the cloture motion.

Sixty votes would be three fifths.

65fastback2+2
01-12-2016, 01:48 PM
Somebody correct me if I'm wrong, but right now it looks like they are voting on a motion to invoke cloture - which I think simply means to end or disallow a filibuster.

If it passes, then they proceed to vote on the bill.

this is correct, i believe.

bronxboy10
01-12-2016, 01:48 PM
Legislation blocked

garyallen59
01-12-2016, 01:49 PM
I hate my senator's so much. :mad:

robertwerden
01-12-2016, 01:49 PM
Now it can be debated

65fastback2+2
01-12-2016, 01:49 PM
Dem's are voting no to try and filibuster.

65fastback2+2
01-12-2016, 01:49 PM
Legislation blocked

uh no

grayfoxjls
01-12-2016, 01:50 PM
It's blocked. What a time to be a Paul supporter. This sucks.

ds21089
01-12-2016, 01:50 PM
uh no

That's what it says on the screen

ClydeCoulter
01-12-2016, 01:50 PM
Damnit!
Has Rand spoken yet?

65fastback2+2
01-12-2016, 01:52 PM
Damnit!
Has Rand spoken yet?

he spoke before cloture vote.

65fastback2+2
01-12-2016, 01:52 PM
That's what it says on the screen

I'm watching it live...nothing on the screen here.

grayfoxjls
01-12-2016, 01:52 PM
Damnit!
Has Rand spoken yet?
He spoke earlier

bronxboy10
01-12-2016, 01:53 PM
Bob Corker R-TN voted NO. He is up for reelection in 2018. He needs to GO. We need to find someone to challenge him in the primary. This should be the end of his Senate career.

Everyone here should call Bob Corker and tell him how disgusted you are with his NO vote. Phone 202-224-3344

Tunink
01-12-2016, 01:53 PM
Is this for Cloture or to kill the vote?

65fastback2+2
01-12-2016, 01:54 PM
i hate i cant find a site live tracking the votes, grr

luctor-et-emergo
01-12-2016, 01:54 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LdX8L4hFV_o
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LdX8L4hFV_o

Zippyjuan
01-12-2016, 01:55 PM
http://thehill.com/policy/finance/265556-sanders-to-back-audit-the-fed-bill


Sanders to vote for Paul's 'Audit the Fed' bill

Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) on Tuesday plans to back legislation from Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) that would subject the Federal Reserve to a comprehensive audit, according to his office.

The vote will put Sanders in rare agreement with a rival presidential candidate in the Republican Party.

In the past, Sanders worked with Paul's father — former Rep. Ron Paul (R-Texas) — on a version of the "Audit the Fed" legislation. Sen. Paul is carrying the torch for that bill, adopting it as a focal point of his presidential run.

Sanders, a noted critic of big banks, hopes to make it back to Washingon from the campaign trail for the Tuesday afternoon vote. Most Democrats are expected to vote against the measure, which is opposed by the Fed as well as the White House.

But while Sanders is a Wall Street scold, he also has plenty of scorn for regulators, such as the Fed, that he views as treating Wall Street with too light a touch.

In December, Sanders wrote in The New York Times that the Fed is in need of fundamental reform, arguing the institution had been “hijacked” by Wall Street banks.

Among the policy prescriptions Sanders put forward was a “full and independent audit” of the Fed annually.

However, Sanders did not mention a Fed audit in a major speech earlier this month outlining his plan to oversee Wall Street.

Paul's bill would subject all the Fed’s operations to external review by the Government Accountability Office. Most of the Fed’s operations are currently subject to outside audit, but its monetary policy deliberations are not. Fed officials have resisted efforts to open those decision up to review, arguing it could subject the Fed to undue political pressure from lawmakers that do not like its decisions.

Jamesiv1
01-12-2016, 01:57 PM
Is this for Cloture or to kill the vote?
Looks to me like they're still voting on cloture

here's the senate.gov live stream link:

http://floor.senate.gov/MediaPlayer.php?view_id=2&event_id=632

garyallen59
01-12-2016, 01:57 PM
http://i.imgur.com/0L0x0xJ.png

ds21089
01-12-2016, 01:57 PM
GA beat me to it

bronxboy10
01-12-2016, 01:59 PM
The bill is dead. Once they hit 40 NO votes, the bill was dead.

r3volution 3.0
01-12-2016, 02:00 PM
I'm waiting for a list of the Republican Nays.

Every single one of them must be primaried.

Origanalist
01-12-2016, 02:01 PM
Don't the repubs have a majority? What frigging good are they?

Dary
01-12-2016, 02:04 PM
What a bunch of fucking criminals. This is treason.

Jamesiv1
01-12-2016, 02:05 PM
ok, so the vote to end debate ("invoke cloture") failed. Doesn't that mean that debate can continue until a vote to invoke cloture passes?

65fastback2+2
01-12-2016, 02:06 PM
Don't the repubs have a majority? What frigging good are they?

not a super-majority.

65fastback2+2
01-12-2016, 02:06 PM
ok, so the vote to end debate ("invoke cloture") failed. Doesn't that mean that debate can continue until a vote to invoke cloture passes?

As far as I am aware, yes.

Tunink
01-12-2016, 02:06 PM
Everyone is saying that this killed the legislation.

r3volution 3.0
01-12-2016, 02:07 PM
Everyone is saying that this killed the legislation.

This (failure to get 60 votes to invoke cloture) prevents a vote on the bill itself.

It's not dead, but it's off the table for now.

ds21089
01-12-2016, 02:08 PM
Sanders came and voted aye. I'm a bit surprised. Not that it will amount to much

Zippyjuan
01-12-2016, 02:08 PM
Means it is not going to be formally voted on by the Senate. Yes, it killed it for this term unless it gets re-introduced.

fcreature
01-12-2016, 02:09 PM
Did Cruz miss this?!

65fastback2+2
01-12-2016, 02:09 PM
Did mcconnell change his vote to nay so that he can rebring it back up?

Jamesiv1
01-12-2016, 02:09 PM
man... that looks like some boring-ass shit.

no wonder they need so much blow and hookers lol

65fastback2+2
01-12-2016, 02:09 PM
Did Cruz miss this?!

yup...too busy hoodwinking voters in louisiana, i think

phill4paul
01-12-2016, 02:09 PM
Don't the repubs have a majority? What frigging good are they?

Nothing. No. Thing. Just like the Dems.

tsai3904
01-12-2016, 02:10 PM
By my count, these were the only party switchers:

Sanders (VT) and Baldwin (WI) voted aye.
Corker (TN) voted no.

Disappointing that three Senators, Donnelly (IN), Heinrich (NM), and Murphy (CT), voted no even though they voted aye on the exact same bill in 2012. Hirono (HI) was an original cosponsor of Rand's other Audit the Fed bill yet voted no.

Update: Murphy (CT) may have been absent. Need to wait for roll call vote to confirm.

tsai3904
01-12-2016, 02:11 PM
Did mcconnell change his vote to nay so that he can rebring it back up?

Yes.

Update: Actually, I'm not sure that he did. If he wants to bring it up again, he'll have to have voted no.

Zippyjuan
01-12-2016, 02:13 PM
Rand Paul yesterday: http://blogs.rollcall.com/wgdb/paul-admits-uphill-climb-for-audit-the-fed/


“‘Audit the Fed’ still has an uphill climb, even in the Senate, and so we’ll see how the vote goes with that. I have said repeatedly though, throughout my time in public life, that the Fed has too much power, and that its power to manipulate interest rates has been deleterious, it hasn’t been good for the economy,” Paul told reporters on a Monday conference call.

“I do want to have more of a marketplace and less of a Fed, but I am an incrementalist in the sense that I’m trying to get what we can possibly get through,” Paul said. “It took a long time even for the concept of ‘Audit the Fed’ to come forward, and then it became very popular in the House, unfortunately we have the resistance of some establishment Republicans in the Senate, so it’s going to be difficult.”

On Monday, Paul was pressuring liberal members of the Democratic caucus, including presidential hopeful Bernard Sanders, I-Vt., to back a vote on the audit measure on Tuesday. The bill would remove limits on the oversight of the Fed by the Government Accountability Office, effectively subjecting the bank to a more comprehensive audit, including sensitive matters related to monetary policy.

“We’ve had a lot of Democrats who claim that they’re concerned about big banks … and a revolving door between Wall Street and the big banks and the Federal Reserve,” Paul said, also citing Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., among “loud voices.”

The vote itself to limit debate on taking up the “Audit the Fed” measure, requiring 60 votes, is set for 2:30 p.m. EST Tuesday, hours before the joint session of Congress for the State of the Union address.

ds21089
01-12-2016, 02:17 PM
Rand Paul yesterday: http://blogs.rollcall.com/wgdb/paul-admits-uphill-climb-for-audit-the-fed/

I found it odd that Graham and McCain voted Yea. They must've known they had the votes already or something.

phill4paul
01-12-2016, 02:18 PM
I found it odd that Graham and McCain voted Yea. They must've known they had the votes already or something.

...or something.

ds21089
01-12-2016, 02:25 PM
I hope Rand goes around urging people to look at who voted No and to make sure not to re-elect them. Next time they are going to bring this bill back, he needs to be saying on TV every chance he gets that whoever votes No doesn't represent what is good for the people and they are probably corrupt after explaining why this audit needs to happen and how it benefits the rich and hurts the poor. You'd think with that mentality more democrats would vote for it, right? Democrats..the supposed Robin Hoods

PCKY
01-12-2016, 02:36 PM
ok, so the vote to end debate ("invoke cloture") failed. Doesn't that mean that debate can continue until a vote to invoke cloture passes?
Yes, they can keep it "open" for debate FOREVER before bringing it back. Rand is stalled, but not dead.

tsai3904
01-12-2016, 02:54 PM
Roll call vote:
http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=114&session=2&vote=00002

tsai3904
01-12-2016, 03:00 PM
It failed 53-44 but was a lot closer than it seems.

2 Rs didn't vote (Coats and Cruz). With their votes, it would have been 55 yes.

FOUR Democrats who supported it earlier flip flopped and voted no today. Donnelly, Heinrich and Murphy all voted for H.R. 459 (which is the SAME bill) in 2012 but voted no today. Hirono was an ORIGINAL cosponsor of S. 264 (which is the SAME bill) in 2015 but voted no today.

If these four Ds didn't flip flop, it would have been 59 yes. We only needed one vulnerable D to switch or Bob Corker (the only R no vote) to vote yes for it to pass.

KEEF
01-12-2016, 03:08 PM
It failed 53-44 but was a lot closer than it seems.

2 Rs didn't vote (Coats and Cruz). With their votes, it would have been 55 yes.

FOUR Democrats who supported it earlier flip flopped and voted no today. Donnelly, Heinrich and Murphy all voted for H.R. 459 (which is the SAME bill) in 2012 but voted no today. Hirono was an ORIGINAL cosponsor of S. 264 (which is the SAME bill) in 2015 but voted no today.

If these four Ds didn't flip flop, it would have been 59 yes. We only needed one vulnerable D to switch or Bob Corker (the only R no vote) to vote yes for it to pass.

... and Sanders would had made it 60.

tsai3904
01-12-2016, 03:12 PM
... and Sanders would had made it 60.

Sanders voted yes.

fcreature
01-12-2016, 03:16 PM
I'm at the point where I'm willing to financially back a primary opponent for Cruz now. This was the last betrayal. Rand needs to HAMMER him on this. Too bad they won't discuss it in the debate, with Paul not being in it.

GunnyFreedom
01-12-2016, 03:19 PM
... and Sanders would had made it 60.

Sanders voted for it.

This was basically a party line vote. Anomalies are highlighted.

http://glenbradley.net/imghost/rpf/2016_01JAN/rollcallauditthefed.png

YoBabyYoBabyYo
01-12-2016, 03:40 PM
Fauxcahontas Elizabeth Warren who is "for the people" of course voted no. LOL

I remember hearing in the GOP debates Ted Cruz stated that " he would take Andrew Jackson off the $20 dollar bill". Today he proved why, he is such a fake.

dillo
01-12-2016, 03:44 PM
Why was cloture invoked, don't u only need 51 to pass?

GunnyFreedom
01-12-2016, 03:47 PM
Why was cloture invoked, don't u only need 51 to pass?

Cloture requires 67 votes, and disallows a filibuster. The Senate hasn't been doing anything for the last several years without a filibuster proof majority, so nowadays if you want something to pass the Senate you will need 67 votes.

tsai3904
01-12-2016, 03:47 PM
Why was cloture invoked, don't u only need 51 to pass?

Cloture was not invoked because it requires 60 votes.

GunnyFreedom
01-12-2016, 03:50 PM
Cloture was not invoked because it requires 60 votes.

Oh, they changed it. :-/

Teh Wiki:

The new version of the cloture rule requiring three-fifths (60%) rather than two-thirds (66.7%) approval, which has remained in place since 1975, makes it considerably easier for the Senate majority to invoke cloture. Even so, a successful cloture motion is uncommon.

phill4paul
01-12-2016, 03:51 PM
Cloture requires 67 votes, and disallows a filibuster. The Senate hasn't been doing anything for the last several years without a filibuster proof majority, so nowadays if you want something to pass the Senate you will need 67 votes.


Oh, they changed it. :-/

Teh Wiki:


The new version of the cloture rule requiring three-fifths (60%) rather than two-thirds (66.7%) approval, which has remained in place since 1975, makes it considerably easier for the Senate majority to invoke cloture. Even so, a successful cloture motion is uncommon.

No better way to insure the status quo.

Brian4Liberty
01-12-2016, 04:04 PM
686998426106478592

timosman
01-12-2016, 04:06 PM
Fauxcahontas Elizabeth Warren who is "for the people" of course voted no. LOL

She will take care of the too big too fail banks except for the biggest one of them :D

dillo
01-12-2016, 04:39 PM
Cloture requires 67 votes, and disallows a filibuster. The Senate hasn't been doing anything for the last several years without a filibuster proof majority, so nowadays if you want something to pass the Senate you will need 67 votes.

So was the bill fillibustered then?

Isnt a normal vote 51-49 pass? But you can debate endlessly and fillibuster unless the senate invokes cloture?

r3volution 3.0
01-12-2016, 04:42 PM
So was the bill fillibustered then?

Isnt a normal vote 51-49 pass? But you can debate endlessly and fillibuster unless the senate invokes cloture?

It wasn't the classic standing-on-the-floor-for-hours-talking filibuster, but in effect, yes.

No cloture, no vote on the bill.

GunnyFreedom
01-12-2016, 04:43 PM
So was the bill fillibustered then?

Never made it to that point.


Isnt a normal vote 51-49 pass? But you can debate endlessly and fillibuster unless the senate invokes cloture?

Yes, a simple majority is a pass, but most bills in the Senate no longer go to an up or down vote anymore without cloture.

It's insanity, but that's how they do.

timosman
01-12-2016, 04:53 PM
Sanders voted yes.

Wasn't he the last senator to vote? The outcome of the vote is known and he shows gracefully his support knowing it is safe to do so?

tsai3904
01-12-2016, 05:05 PM
Wasn't he the last senator to vote? The outcome of the vote is known and he shows gracefully his support knowing it is safe to do so?

Yes, he was. I read reports that they kept the vote open for him because he was arriving late. It makes sense for Republicans to hold it open for a Democratic vote to make it bipartisan.

TheNewYorker
01-12-2016, 05:08 PM
Sanders voting yes on this seals the deal for me, I would rather have Sanders than Hillary in 2016

r3volution 3.0
01-12-2016, 05:14 PM
Sanders voting yes on this seals the deal for me, I would rather have Sanders than Hillary in 2016

You know that his objection to the Fed is that it's monetary policy is too tight?

timosman
01-12-2016, 05:14 PM
Sanders voting yes on this seals the deal for me, I would rather have Sanders than Hillary in 2016

His vote did not matter. Why are you falling for this? :confused:

ClydeCoulter
01-12-2016, 05:16 PM
Perhaps Rand didn't want any Amendments to be attached, so he went for Cloture.?

TheNewYorker
01-12-2016, 05:18 PM
His vote did not matter. Why are you falling for this? :confused:

Rand asked Bernie to vote yes, and he voted yes. This shows that Bernie must have some respect for Rand, even though they are worlds apart on policy

r3volution 3.0
01-12-2016, 05:19 PM
Rand asked Bernie to vote yes, and he voted yes. This shows that Bernie must have some respect for Rand, even though they are worlds apart on policy

I think he did it to boost his populist, "progressive" credentials.

For Dems it's about eat the rich (bankers); they don't see the issue as we do.

tsai3904
01-12-2016, 05:20 PM
Perhaps Rand didn't want any Amendments to be attached, so he went for Cloture.?

The Democrats filibustered the bill requiring Republicans to invoke cloture if they want to proceed.

luctor-et-emergo
01-12-2016, 05:22 PM
Rand asked Bernie to vote yes, and he voted yes. This shows that Bernie must have some respect for Rand, even though they are worlds apart on policy

Bernie is not partisan, he just has wonky ideas all the time.

timosman
01-12-2016, 05:24 PM
Rand asked Bernie to vote yes, and he voted yes. This shows that Bernie must have some respect for Rand, even though they are worlds apart on policy

Do you think he would cast the yes vote if it was the deciding vote??? Why was he dragging his feet for so long? His yes vote might have influenced other dems if casted earlier.

timosman
01-12-2016, 05:26 PM
The Democrats filibustered the bill requiring Republicans to invoke cloture if they want to proceed.

They should have let them filibuster. This would look extremely stupid on their part filibustering this. Who decided to invoke the cloture? I hope it was not Paul.

TheNewYorker
01-12-2016, 05:29 PM
...or something.

I am curious about this.

Has mccain or Graham said anything ever about this bill?

derek4ever
01-12-2016, 06:20 PM
No matter what, rand has shown his never say die lately and i'm extremely thankful for trying to shed a light on the fed. You come from good stock and just as you fought for us, we'll do the same in the precincts! :)

tsai3904
01-12-2016, 07:34 PM
They should have let them filibuster. This would look extremely stupid on their part filibustering this. Who decided to invoke the cloture? I hope it was not Paul.

Letting them filibuster just means the bill never goes to the floor for a vote.

tsai3904
01-12-2016, 07:36 PM
Has mccain or Graham said anything ever about this bill?

Here's McCain's statement after the vote:


Washington, D.C. – U.S. Senator John McCain (R-AZ) released the following statement today on voting to advance the “Audit the Fed” bill that would subject the Federal Reserve to a comprehensive audit and enhanced congressional oversight:

“Today I voted in support of a bill to audit the Federal Reserve so that the American people have greater transparency and accountability into how the Fed creates monetary policy. This bill would mandate much-needed congressional oversight of the Federal Reserve by removing legal barriers that have prevented the nonpartisan Government Accountability Office from fully auditing the Fed. It would also help prevent these central bankers, whose deliberations are kept completely secret from the public, from creating economic booms and busts. Unfortunately, Democrats in Congress have acted to maintain the status quo and keep the Fed’s policy decisions about the trillions of American tax dollars it controls secret by preventing this bill from moving forward. I will continue working with my colleagues to move this commonsense proposal forward and protect the American people who are directly impacted by the Fed’s policies and decisions.”


http://www.mccain.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/press-releases?ID=4f63fb03-90cc-4847-b529-c9bfa148494d

dillo
01-12-2016, 07:38 PM
This procedure is confusing me now, they need to update school house rock

timosman
01-12-2016, 07:39 PM
Letting them filibuster just means the bill never goes to the floor for a vote.

Which is fine. The point is to show the clowns doing filibustering for this on TV.

Matt Collins
01-12-2016, 08:31 PM
Bob Corker R-TN voted NO. He is up for reelection in 2018. He needs to GO. We need to find someone to challenge him in the primary. This should be the end of his Senate career.

Everyone here should call Bob Corker and tell him how disgusted you are with his NO vote. Phone 202-224-3344
This asshat, Bailout Bob, is one of the wealthiest in the Senate. And he is as corrupt as the day is long. But there is a rumor he might be running for Governor of TN in the next couple of years. We'll see...

Matt Collins
01-12-2016, 08:32 PM
It failed 53-44 but was a lot closer than it seems.

2 Rs didn't vote (Coats and Cruz). With their votes, it would have been 55 yes.

FOUR Democrats who supported it earlier flip flopped and voted no today. Donnelly, Heinrich and Murphy all voted for H.R. 459 (which is the SAME bill) in 2012 but voted no today. Hirono was an ORIGINAL cosponsor of S. 264 (which is the SAME bill) in 2015 but voted no today.

If these four Ds didn't flip flop, it would have been 59 yes. We only needed one vulnerable D to switch or Bob Corker (the only R no vote) to vote yes for it to pass.
Exactly....


If we can get a President that won't veto it, and we can run this again with some very focused and intense pressure on 6 or 7 Senators, then it will become law.

CPUd
01-12-2016, 08:39 PM
Is it true that only Senators who didn't vote can bring it back to the floor? This is what the Cruzers are starting to say.

PCKY
01-12-2016, 08:47 PM
Is it true that only Senators who didn't vote can bring it back to the floor? This is what the Cruzers are starting to say.
That is the Leader's priveledge I believe. McConnell did that earlier.

GunnyFreedom
01-12-2016, 09:19 PM
Letting them filibuster just means the bill never goes to the floor for a vote.

Not really, it just means you have to wait 12 or so hours before a vote.

GunnyFreedom
01-12-2016, 09:21 PM
Is it true that only Senators who didn't vote can bring it back to the floor? This is what the Cruzers are starting to say.

Never heard of such a thing. I do know that only those who voted on the prevailing side can bring a bill back up for reconsideration.

GunnyFreedom
01-12-2016, 09:32 PM
http://www.rules.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?p=RuleXIII


RULES OF THE SENATE

RECONSIDERATION

PDF of Rule XIII

1. When a question has been decided by the Senate, any Senator voting with the prevailing side or who has not voted may, on the same day or on either of the next two days of actual session thereafter, move a reconsideration; and if the Senate shall refuse to reconsider such a motion entered, or if such a motion is withdrawn by leave of the Senate, or if upon reconsideration the Senate shall affirm its first decision, no further motion to reconsider shall be in order unless by unanimous consent. Every motion to reconsider shall be decided by a majority vote, and may be laid on the table without affecting the question in reference to which the same is made, which shall be a final disposition of the motion.

2. When a bill, resolution, report, amendment, order, or message, upon which a vote has been taken, shall have gone out of the possession of the Senate and been communicated to the House of Representatives, the motion to reconsider shall be accompanied by a motion to request the House to return the same; which last motion shall be acted upon immediately, and without debate, and if determined in the negative shall be a final disposition of the motion to reconsider.

Cruz has 2 Session days to move a motion to reconsider until we can tell those people they are spinning bullshit.

Scott_in_PA
01-12-2016, 09:41 PM
http://www.rules.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?p=RuleXIII



Cruz has 2 Session days to move a motion to reconsider until we can tell those people they are spinning bullshit.

Will this be Thursday...and valid question in the debate?

GunnyFreedom
01-12-2016, 09:48 PM
Will this be Thursday...and valid question in the debate?

It will not be Thursday. The Senate has only been running 1 or 2 Session days a week lately.

GunnyFreedom
01-12-2016, 09:49 PM
I do not in fact know when it will be. I looked all over Congress.gov site for a schedule of session days and it is not to be had.

Scott_in_PA
01-12-2016, 09:53 PM
I do not in fact know when it will be. I looked all over Congress.gov site for a schedule of session days and it is not to be had.

Thanks +rep for looking.

notsure
01-12-2016, 10:01 PM
Does this look like an accurate schedule?
"Tentative"

http://www.senate.gov/legislative/resources/pdf/2016_calendar.pdf

notsure
01-12-2016, 10:04 PM
Does this look like an accurate schedule?
"Tentative"

http://www.senate.gov/legislative/resources/pdf/2016_calendar.pdf

I don't know, because the Senate calendar only shows 3 sessions for January.

GunnyFreedom
01-12-2016, 10:23 PM
Does this look like an accurate schedule?
"Tentative"

http://www.senate.gov/legislative/resources/pdf/2016_calendar.pdf

it's possible. That is of course tentative. If it does turn out to be accurate, then Thursday will indeed be that deadline. I looked everywhere for that, but I was also getting lots of 404's.

GunnyFreedom
01-12-2016, 10:26 PM
I don't know, because the Senate calendar only shows 3 sessions for January.
The one I did find only listed PREVIOUS Session days, and showed 3 for January, including last week Monday, which is not on the tentative schedule.

GunnyFreedom
01-12-2016, 10:35 PM
I suppose I should have looked at senate.gov rather than congress.gov lol

+rep

GunnyFreedom
01-12-2016, 10:37 PM
Is it true that only Senators who didn't vote can bring it back to the floor? This is what the Cruzers are starting to say.

We now know that if Cruz doesn't move to reconsider by end of Session Thursday, this is complete bullshit.