Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Wayners who wrote (682834)	5/19/2005 6:45:10 PM
From: DuckTapeSunroof	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769667

What is the role of the House and Senate Parliamentarian? Are they elected or appointed? The Senate Parliamentarian serves at the pleasure of the Senate Majority Leader, and functions under the direction of the Secretary of the Senate as a non-partisan employee of the Senate. The House Parliamentarian serves with the consent of the Speaker of the House, also in a non-partisan capacity, advising Members of both parties. The complexity of the job requires years of apprenticeship, and the leaders of both chambers have respected the institutional experience necessary to perform the job well. Sitting Parliamentarians hire their own assistants, and for decades, those assistants have advanced to the position of Parliamentarian when a vacancy has occurred. The Parliamentarians in both chambers have as their key responsibility advising the Member of Congress presiding over the floor throughout a day's session. The Parliamentarian guides the Chair in formulating his responses to parliamentary inquiries and his rulings on points of order. In the House, the Parliamentarian on duty stands to the right of the Chair or sits very close by on the rostrum. In the Senate, the Parliamentarian sits on the lower tier of the rostrum just below the presiding officer. He is frequently seen swiveling around in his chair, which faces the Senate floor, to address the Senator presiding behind him. While the Member of Congress presiding is free to take or ignore the advice of the Parliamentarian, most abide by his guidance. Few Members have the independent body of knowledge regarding the chamber's procedures necessary to preside on their own. In the Senate, the Parliamentarian, and in the House, the Parliamentarian's Clerk, also keep track of the time when Members are allotted a specific number of minutes to speak. The Parliamentarians also answer questions from individual Members and congressional staff on a wide variety of subjects, and on a confidential basis. For example, the Parliamentarians are asked to review drafts of bills prior to their introduction and drafts of amendments to ascertain they conform to the rules of the body. They help formulate points of order for Members wishing to mount a floor challenge. Perhaps the most time-consuming element of the job is to review all proposed bills and, based on their content, refer them to the appropriate committee of jurisdiction for legislative consideration. The parliamentarians also assist committees in preparing for and conducting hearings and mark-ups of legislation. The Office of the Parliamentarian is also responsible for compiling and publishing at the start of each new Congress any changes to the rules of the chamber. They also compile and maintain the parliamentary precedents of the chamber. Parliamentarians both apprentice for and serve in their positions for long periods. Developing the expertise required for the job is an extensive effort, requiring a law degree and years of watching parliamentary maneuvers play out on the House or Senate floors. c-span.org

To: Wayners who wrote (682834)	5/19/2005 6:47:14 PM
From: DuckTapeSunroof	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769667

Parliamentarian would oppose 'nuclear option' By Geoff Earle hillnews.com If Republicans seek to break the Democratic filibuster of judicial nominees, they would have to do so over the objections of the Senate parliamentarian, according to Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.). Such objections by the appointed keeper of the Senate’s rules would have little practical effect — since any Republican sitting in the chair would be free to reject or ignore the parliamentarian’s advice. But opposition from an ostensibly neutral staff member could have a political impact, making the GOP tactic appear to be out of bounds. Even Sen. Trent Lott (R-Miss.) — a strong proponent of breaking the filibuster — acknowledged that “anything right now might have some political value” in the charged debate over judicial nominations. But, as Lott put it, “The presiding officer rules. The parliamentarian is a human being. He offers advice.” When he was majority leader, Lott appointed the parliamentarian, Alan Frumin, after firing his predecessor, Bob Dove. Reid received the assurance from the parliamentarian during a private conversation within the past few weeks, according to aides. Reid told reporters this week that the parliamentarian assured him that, if Republicans go through with the move, “they will have to overrule him, because what they are doing is wrong.” A Congressional Research Service report on the subject, updated this month, leaves little doubt that moves being contemplated by Republicans — specifically a ruling that a supermajority requirement to cut off debate is not in order — would not be based on previous precedents of the Senate. The appeal of such a ruling would normally be debatable, although a Republican could move to table any such appeal — denying Democrats the opportunity to delay a ruling. “Employment of either of these versions of the ‘constitutional option’ would require the chair to overturn previous precedent,” according to the report, “either by ruling on a question that by precedent has been submitted to the Senate, or by ruling non-debatable a question that by precedent has been treated as debatable.” Reid also said that, if Republicans employed the so-called “nuclear option,” “it would do harm forever to this country and to this institution.” According to one Senate Democratic aide, Reid made known his conversation with the parliamentarian “so that people know how beyond the pale this is.” Frumin did not return a phone call seeking to confirm his conversation with Reid by press time. Republican Senate aides say they have long expected that the parliamentarian might not rule in their favor, since there is no specific precedent on the books to sustain it. But they note that whoever is in the chair would not even have to ask the parliamentarian for his view, and they emphasize the unprecedented nature of the Democratic filibuster of appeals court nominees. Under another scenario laid out by Marty Gold, a former senior aide to Majority Leader Bill Frist (R-Tenn.), Frist may seek a ruling that continued debate on a nominee is “dilatory.” Whoever is sitting in the chair then could rule on his own that debate should be cut off, setting off an appeal and tabling motion. Meanwhile, as the moment when Republicans may act approaches, GOP senators have begun thinking about how to stage-manage how the nuclear option plays out on the floor for maximum political impact — as well as parliamentary effect. Originally, it had been thought that Vice President Cheney, who also serves as president of the Senate, would sit in the chair to issue the seminal ruling. But Sen. Ted Stevens (R-Alaska) told The Hill that he is so upset by the Democratic filibuster that he plans to be in the chair. As the most senior member of the majority party, Stevens is the president pro tempore of the Senate, a largely ceremonial post that puts him in the presidential line of succession. According to Lott, Stevens is “the best man in the chair. … He knows the rules of the Senate as well as anybody.” Lott did not rule out that Cheney would be in the chair. Republicans also are thinking about which GOP member would raise a point of order from the floor. Lott said that, if he were setting up an ideal situation, he would have Stevens sitting in the chair and Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-Utah) raising the point of order from the floor. He also mentioned Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Arlen Specter (R-Pa.), although Specter has expressed concerns about the impact exercising the nuclear option could have on the Senate. Alternatively, Frist may raise the point of order himself. Any role played by Frist, who has said he is retiring in 2006, could affect his likely presidential campaign. “If he does that,” Lott said, “it would show courage, leadership and would probably affect the outcome. But you’ve got to weigh the other consequences of that now.” Meanwhile, aides say Frist and Reid continue to seek ways to avoid a confrontation on the floor through talks, although neither side has reported any progress.