Senate Rule 19

Tuesday night, February 7th, Elizabeth Warren was speaking against the nomination of jeff sessions for the position of Attorney General.  Senator Warren was doing what absolutely need to be done; anything she could to oppose and delay the confirmation of sessions.  I believe that Warren is in touch with reality and therefore knows that sessions will be the next Attorney General of our country.  I also believe that Senator Warren maintains the smallest kernel of hope that some Republican Senators can have their core of decency accessed and therefore was doing whatever she could to reach that distant spot.  Finally, I feel sure that Elizabeth Warren knows that every moment that jeff sessions is not leading the Justice Department is another moment that he cannot act out in bigoted and destructive ways.

mitch mcconnell took exception to Senator Warren reading a letter from Coretta Scott King which was admitted to the Senate confirmation hearings regarding sessions's nomination to a seat on the Federal Court in 1986.  mcconnell did not appreciate the phrase in Mrs King's letter that read that sessions had used the "the awesome power of his office [as South Carolina Attorney general] to chill the free exercise of the vote by black citizens in the district he now seeks to serve as a federal judge."  In order to stop Elizabeth Warren from reading this letter and to stop her from speaking all together, mcconnell invoked a rarely used rule in Senate proceedings, rule 19 regarding debate.  Clause two (2) of this rule reads as follows, which enabled mcconnel to then use rule four (4):


- Rule XIX, clause 2 and clause 4

2. No Senator in debate shall, directly or indirectly, by any form of words impute to another Senator or to other Senators any conduct or motive unworthy or unbecoming a Senator.

4. If any Senator, in speaking or otherwise, in the opinion of the Presiding Officer transgress the rules of the Senate the Presiding Officer shall, either on his own motion or at the request of any other Senator, call him [or her] to order; and when a Senator shall be called to order he [or she] shall take his [or her] seat, and may not proceed without leave of the Senate, which, if granted, shall be upon motion that he [or she] be allowed to proceed in order, which motion shall be determined without debate. Any Senator directed by the Presiding Officer to take his [or her] seat, and any Senator requesting the Presiding Officer to require a Senator to take his [or her] seat, may appeal from the ruling of the Chair, which appeal shall be open to debate.

http://www.rules.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?p=RuleXIX


This seems like a big pile of horse dung to me.  mcconnell was looking for any excuse he could find to stop Senator Warren's voice of descent, and he was supported by the republican majority in the chamber.  Mrs. King's letter from 1986 is already on the record.  Elizabeth warren was simply reading something that was already on record.  They were not Senator Warren's words, they were Coretta Scott King's.

Now wait,  there's more cow crap (I like the alliteration).  jeff sessions is nominated for a position in the administration.  I tried to find out if he is still a Senator and if so is he still a voting member of the Senate.  I couldn't find an answer.  When I bring up jeff sessions's page to correspond with him, I get the following:


"Thank you for your contact with Senator Sessions. His twenty years of faithful public service in the U.S. Senate would not have been made possible without the support of his constituents. The office of Senator Sessions is no longer receiving correspondence; however, the office is still reachable by phone at (202)224-4124. If you are a resident of Alabama and need further assistance, please contact Alabama Senator Richard Shelby or your Alabama Congressman."

So........is he a Senator or not.  Because if he's not, then clause 2  of rule XIX doesn't apply.  I mean......is he or isn't he?  Is this another instance of trying have cake and eating it too?  Seems to me he has one foot in the administration and the other in Congress.  So as soon as he's confirmed, can Senator Warren can read Coretta Scott King's letter in the Senate Chamber?  What a load!!!

Seems to me that it's time for another ethics legislation suggestion.  While I feel comfortable with the typical wording of Constitutional Amendments, I am not with writing legislation, which has much more convoluted language.  Therefore, in a nut shell:

When any member of Congress is nominated for and accepts that nomination for a position in the administrative branch, then that individual is suspended from all privileges and responsibilities as a member of the Congress, pending a confirmation vote in the Senate.  Should the confirmation vote not confirm the nomination, then the member is reinstated to his or her position in Congress prior to the nomination.

Lastly, I want to make note of something that Senator Warren said last night when being interviewed on The Rachel Maddow Show on MSNBC:

"I hope everyone reads the letter [written by Coretta Scott King]. It is eloquent, and it reminds us of a time in history that we would like to think is far behind us but reminds us that it is not."

And to that end, I am including a link to Mrs. King's letter submitted to the Senate in 1986 regarding jeff seesions's nomination to the Federal Bench.

https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/3259988-Scott-King-1986-Letter-and-Testimony-Signed.html#document/p1