Biden Cabinet Confirmation Live Thread ***hearings, votes, etc.***

[President Johnson]

It's laughable Garland is still confirmed or close to. He's one of the most important cabinet members, so they need to speed up now.

[H.E. VOLODYMYR ZELENKSYY]

It's laughable Garland is still confirmed or close to. He's one of the most important cabinet members, so they need to speed up now.

Him and Becerra.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

It's laughable Garland is still confirmed or close to. He's one of the most important cabinet members, so they need to speed up now.

It's only a week now until he goes before the Judiciary committee, rather than 5 years the last time he was nominated.

[ηєω ƒяσηтιєя]

https://twitter.com/cnnbrk/status/1362198860974686211

[brucejoel99]

https://twitter.com/cnnbrk/status/1362198860974686211

She was a deputy director there during the Obama years, so I'm sure she's well-suited for the role.

[AndyHogan14]

UPDATED SCHEDULE:
February 22
9:30am • Garland (Hearing; Judiciary • Day 1)
5:30pm • Thomas-Greenfield (Cloture)

February 23
9:30am • Garland (Hearing; Judiciary • Day 2)
9:30am • Haaland (Hearing; Energy)
10:00am • Becerra (Hearing; HELP)
TBA • Vilsack (Senate Vote)

February 24
2:30pm • Guzman (Committee Vote; SBE)
TBA • Tanden (Committee Vote; Budget)

March 1
TBA • Garland (Committee Vote; Judiciary)

***

Confirmed
Blinken, Yellen, Austin, Buttigieg, McDonough, Mayorkas, Haines

Awaiting Full Senate Vote
Vilsack (2/23), Raimondo (TBA), Fudge (TBA), Granholm (TBA), Walsh (TBA), Cardona (TBA), Thomas-Greenfield (Cloture 2/22), Rouse (TBA), Regan (TBA)

Awaiting Committee Vote
Guzman (2/24), Garland (3/1), Tanden (2/24; Budget), Tanden (TBA; HSGAC)

Awaiting Committee Hearing
Garland (2/22-23), Haaland (2/23), Becerra (2/23)

Committee Hearings Not Yet Scheduled
Tai, Lander

***

Haaland's hearings have been added to the schedule and next Tuesday is shaping up to be a busy day with three important hearings and a full Senate vote on Vilsack. Tanden's Budget committee vote has been scheduled for next Wednesday. Also, while not a major cabinet official, Adewale Adeyemo's committee hearing has been scheduled for next Tuesday at 10am.

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

UPDATED SCHEDULE:
February 22
9:30am • Garland (Hearing; Judiciary • Day 1)
5:30pm • Thomas-Greenfield (Cloture)

February 23
9:30am • Garland (Hearing; Judiciary • Day 2)
9:30am • Haaland (Hearing; Energy)
10:00am • Becerra (Hearing; HELP)
TBA • Vilsack (Senate Vote)

February 24
2:30pm • Guzman (Committee Vote; SBE)
TBA • Tanden (Committee Vote; Budget)

March 1
TBA • Garland (Committee Vote; Judiciary)

***

Confirmed
Blinken, Yellen, Austin, Buttigieg, McDonough, Mayorkas, Haines

Awaiting Full Senate Vote
Vilsack (2/23), Raimondo (TBA), Fudge (TBA), Granholm (TBA), Walsh (TBA), Cardona (TBA), Thomas-Greenfield (Cloture 2/22), Rouse (TBA), Regan (TBA)

Awaiting Committee Vote
Guzman (2/24), Garland (3/1), Tanden (2/24; Budget), Tanden (TBA; HSGAC)

Awaiting Committee Hearing
Garland (2/22-23), Haaland (2/23), Becerra (2/23)

Committee Hearings Not Yet Scheduled
Tai, Lander

***

Haaland's hearings have been added to the schedule and next Tuesday is shaping up to be a busy day with three important hearings and a full Senate vote on Vilsack. Tanden's Budget committee vote has been scheduled for next Wednesday. Also, while not a major cabinet official, Adewale Adeyemo's committee hearing has been scheduled for next Tuesday at 10am.

I’d say Deputy Treasury Secretary is a pretty important job (really deputy Cabinet Secretaries in general).

[Meatball Ron]

UPDATED SCHEDULE:
February 22
9:30am • Garland (Hearing; Judiciary • Day 1)
5:30pm • Thomas-Greenfield (Cloture)

February 23
9:30am • Garland (Hearing; Judiciary • Day 2)
9:30am • Haaland (Hearing; Energy)
10:00am • Becerra (Hearing; HELP)
TBA • Vilsack (Senate Vote)

February 24
2:30pm • Guzman (Committee Vote; SBE)
TBA • Tanden (Committee Vote; Budget)

March 1
TBA • Garland (Committee Vote; Judiciary)

***

Confirmed
Blinken, Yellen, Austin, Buttigieg, McDonough, Mayorkas, Haines

Awaiting Full Senate Vote
Vilsack (2/23), Raimondo (TBA), Fudge (TBA), Granholm (TBA), Walsh (TBA), Cardona (TBA), Thomas-Greenfield (Cloture 2/22), Rouse (TBA), Regan (TBA)

Awaiting Committee Vote
Guzman (2/24), Garland (3/1), Tanden (2/24; Budget), Tanden (TBA; HSGAC)

Awaiting Committee Hearing
Garland (2/22-23), Haaland (2/23), Becerra (2/23)

Committee Hearings Not Yet Scheduled
Tai, Lander

***

Haaland's hearings have been added to the schedule and next Tuesday is shaping up to be a busy day with three important hearings and a full Senate vote on Vilsack. Tanden's Budget committee vote has been scheduled for next Wednesday. Also, while not a major cabinet official, Adewale Adeyemo's committee hearing has been scheduled for next Tuesday at 10am.

What do you peg as the odds that Raimondo is confirmed next week?

[AndyHogan14]

snip

What do you peg as the odds that Raimondo is confirmed next week?

Pretty good being that she has already cleared committee, but you never know. I haven't heard any rumors of a filibuster of her but that could still be taken care of by next Friday if Schumer wanted to invoke cloture early in the week.

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

UPDATED SCHEDULE:
February 22
9:30am • Garland (Hearing; Judiciary • Day 1)
5:30pm • Thomas-Greenfield (Cloture)

February 23
9:30am • Garland (Hearing; Judiciary • Day 2)
9:30am • Haaland (Hearing; Energy)
10:00am • Becerra (Hearing; HELP)
TBA • Vilsack (Senate Vote)

February 24
2:30pm • Guzman (Committee Vote; SBE)
TBA • Tanden (Committee Vote; Budget)

March 1
TBA • Garland (Committee Vote; Judiciary)

***

Confirmed
Blinken, Yellen, Austin, Buttigieg, McDonough, Mayorkas, Haines

Awaiting Full Senate Vote
Vilsack (2/23), Raimondo (TBA), Fudge (TBA), Granholm (TBA), Walsh (TBA), Cardona (TBA), Thomas-Greenfield (Cloture 2/22), Rouse (TBA), Regan (TBA)

Awaiting Committee Vote
Guzman (2/24), Garland (3/1), Tanden (2/24; Budget), Tanden (TBA; HSGAC)

Awaiting Committee Hearing
Garland (2/22-23), Haaland (2/23), Becerra (2/23)

Committee Hearings Not Yet Scheduled
Tai, Lander

***

Haaland's hearings have been added to the schedule and next Tuesday is shaping up to be a busy day with three important hearings and a full Senate vote on Vilsack. Tanden's Budget committee vote has been scheduled for next Wednesday. Also, while not a major cabinet official, Adewale Adeyemo's committee hearing has been scheduled for next Tuesday at 10am.

What do you peg as the odds that Raimondo is confirmed next week?

Raimondo will be confirmed pretty easily.

[Meatball Ron]

UPDATED SCHEDULE:
February 22
9:30am • Garland (Hearing; Judiciary • Day 1)
5:30pm • Thomas-Greenfield (Cloture)

February 23
9:30am • Garland (Hearing; Judiciary • Day 2)
9:30am • Haaland (Hearing; Energy)
10:00am • Becerra (Hearing; HELP)
TBA • Vilsack (Senate Vote)

February 24
2:30pm • Guzman (Committee Vote; SBE)
TBA • Tanden (Committee Vote; Budget)

March 1
TBA • Garland (Committee Vote; Judiciary)

***

Confirmed
Blinken, Yellen, Austin, Buttigieg, McDonough, Mayorkas, Haines

Awaiting Full Senate Vote
Vilsack (2/23), Raimondo (TBA), Fudge (TBA), Granholm (TBA), Walsh (TBA), Cardona (TBA), Thomas-Greenfield (Cloture 2/22), Rouse (TBA), Regan (TBA)

Awaiting Committee Vote
Guzman (2/24), Garland (3/1), Tanden (2/24; Budget), Tanden (TBA; HSGAC)

Awaiting Committee Hearing
Garland (2/22-23), Haaland (2/23), Becerra (2/23)

Committee Hearings Not Yet Scheduled
Tai, Lander

***

Haaland's hearings have been added to the schedule and next Tuesday is shaping up to be a busy day with three important hearings and a full Senate vote on Vilsack. Tanden's Budget committee vote has been scheduled for next Wednesday. Also, while not a major cabinet official, Adewale Adeyemo's committee hearing has been scheduled for next Tuesday at 10am.

What do you peg as the odds that Raimondo is confirmed next week?

Raimondo will be confirmed pretty easily.

Sorry, to clarify, I didn't mean whether she is confirmed *at all* but specifically whether the vote happens *next week*

[Meatball Ron]

snip

What do you peg as the odds that Raimondo is confirmed next week?

Pretty good being that she has already cleared committee, but you never know. I haven't heard any rumors of a filibuster of her but that could still be taken care of by next Friday if Schumer wanted to invoke cloture early in the week.

True, but 9 nominees have cleared committee, and given how slowly they've been moving, I doubt all would get a vote next week. So I'm curious how high Raimondo is in the order of priority / importance. Seems that, at a minimum, Cardona and LTG will get a full Senate vote first (and Vilsack of course).

[ηєω ƒяσηтιєя]

snip

What do you peg as the odds that Raimondo is confirmed next week?

Pretty good being that she has already cleared committee, but you never know. I haven't heard any rumors of a filibuster of her but that could still be taken care of by next Friday if Schumer wanted to invoke cloture early in the week.

True, but 9 nominees have cleared committee, and given how slowly they've been moving, I doubt all would get a vote next week. So I'm curious how high Raimondo is in the order of priority / importance. Seems that, at a minimum, Cardona and LTG will get a full Senate vote first (and Vilsack of course).

The reason for the delay in confirmation votes was due to the lack of an organizing resolution and then the impeachment trial. Things should be much quicker next week.

[LeBron]

Someone more familiar with the betting markets should confirm this, but apparently the expectation that many of these nominees won't be confirmed until after March 1st has created a stir because that is PredictIt's contract date.

Fudge in particular will be one of the nominees sworn in after that date. Pelosi is gonna need her vote for the stimulus next week, so the earliest possible confirmation date for Fudge is probably the following week.

[Stuart98]

https://twitter.com/AndrewSolender/status/1362871954022277125

Looks like Tanden's nomination is dead, barring some crossover GOP votes.

[Attorney General, LGC Speaker, and Former PPT Dwarven Dragon]

https://twitter.com/AndrewSolender/status/1362871954022277125
Looks like Tanden's nomination is dead, barring some crossover GOP votes.

True R-WV at work

[randomusername]

https://twitter.com/AndrewSolender/status/1362871954022277125

Looks like Tanden's nomination is dead, barring some crossover GOP votes.

Do they still bring her to a vote or do they withdraw her nomination?

[Attorney General, LGC Speaker, and Former PPT Dwarven Dragon]

Like I've previously pointed out, though, the man has never cast a deciding vote against the Democratic Party line over the course of his nearly 10 years in the Senate. That's just not changing now.

well this aged well. Any comment?

[Ferguson97]

Joe Manchin voted to confirm Jeff Sessions, Brett Kavanaugh, William Barr, and Mike Pompeo, but Neera Tanden's tweets were just too much for him.

[brucejoel99]

Like I've previously pointed out, though, the man has never cast a deciding vote against the Democratic Party line over the course of his nearly 10 years in the Senate. That's just not changing now.

well this aged well. Any comment?

Well, last I checked, I missed the part where he's confirmed to be casting a deciding vote against the Democratic Party line by taking this stand, so my comment would be to f**king wait:

Remember guys, Manchin literally never votes against the party line when it matters, and it's stupid and naive to think that he will. I'm sure that he's only doing this because he knows there are loads of Republicans to pad the margin.

(This is sarcastic in case you can't tell)

Y'all, can we calm the f**k down for literally 5 seconds & just wait & see how this plays out a bit more. It's entirely possible that he's been told Tanden has at least 1 Republican vote (so, literally pick 1 of your Romneys, Murkowskis, Collins', etc.) & that this is therefore not a time where his vote actually matters. But thank you for your failed attempt at a burn, though, very cool!

[ηєω ƒяσηтιєя]

https://twitter.com/AndrewSolender/status/1362871954022277125

Looks like Tanden's nomination is dead, barring some crossover GOP votes.

I WAS RIGHT!!!!!!!

See, I told you guys. I said that Manchin would be opposed to Neera Tanden from the beginning.

Tanden better hope that Romney/Collins/Murkowski aren't also a NO because her nomination is DOA otherwise.

[free my dawg]

I supported her nomination purely on "lesser of two evils" grounds. Maybe you shouldn't be an asshole or blame members of your party for COVID outbreaks if you want a job.

[Attorney General, LGC Speaker, and Former PPT Dwarven Dragon]

Like I've previously pointed out, though, the man has never cast a deciding vote against the Democratic Party line over the course of his nearly 10 years in the Senate. That's just not changing now.

well this aged well. Any comment?

Well, last I checked, I missed the part where he's confirmed to be casting a deciding vote against the Democratic Party line by taking this stand, so my comment would be to f**king wait:

Remember guys, Manchin literally never votes against the party line when it matters, and it's stupid and naive to think that he will. I'm sure that he's only doing this because he knows there are loads of Republicans to pad the margin.

(This is sarcastic in case you can't tell)

Y'all, can we calm the f**k down for literally 5 seconds & just wait & see how this plays out a bit more. It's entirely possible that he's been told Tanden has at least 1 Republican vote (so, literally pick 1 of your Romneys, Murkowskis, Collins', etc.) & that this is therefore not a time where his vote actually matters. But thank you for your failed attempt at a burn, though, very cool!

Maybe (I highly doubt it), but I do note that Manchin is announcing this ahead of any R publicly saying they're a yes.

The problem with Manchin is that we should not have to get down on our knees and beg Murkowski (here) or the Budget Committee (in the case of the budget amendments that he provided deciding votes for) to cover for his misbehavior. He should know enough to provide the desired result himself.

I'm honestly sick and tired of treating someone who voted with Trump more often than not, voted for 80% of his judges, and already has or plans to cast several deciding votes against the dems in this congress, as a Democrat. We need to kick him out of the caucus.

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

Like I've previously pointed out, though, the man has never cast a deciding vote against the Democratic Party line over the course of his nearly 10 years in the Senate. That's just not changing now.

well this aged well. Any comment?

Well, last I checked, I missed the part where he's confirmed to be casting a deciding vote against the Democratic Party line by taking this stand, so my comment would be to f**king wait:

Remember guys, Manchin literally never votes against the party line when it matters, and it's stupid and naive to think that he will. I'm sure that he's only doing this because he knows there are loads of Republicans to pad the margin.

(This is sarcastic in case you can't tell)

Y'all, can we calm the f**k down for literally 5 seconds & just wait & see how this plays out a bit more. It's entirely possible that he's been told Tanden has at least 1 Republican vote (so, literally pick 1 of your Romneys, Murkowskis, Collins', etc.) & that this is therefore not a time where his vote actually matters. But thank you for your failed attempt at a burn, though, very cool!

Maybe (I highly doubt it), but I do note that Manchin is announcing this ahead of any R publicly saying they're a yes.

The problem with Manchin is that we should not have to get down on our knees and beg Murkowski (here) or the Budget Committee (in the case of the budget amendments that he provided deciding votes for) to cover for his misbehavior. He should know enough to provide the desired result himself.

I'm honestly sick and tired of treating someone who voted with Trump more often than not, voted for 80% of his judges, and already has or plans to cast several deciding votes against the dems in this congress, as a Democrat. We need to kick him out of the caucus.

I was following until the last paragraph. How in God's name would deliberately making McConnell Majority Leader again just to teach Manchin a lesson or whatever be preferable to the current situation?

[brucejoel99]

Like I've previously pointed out, though, the man has never cast a deciding vote against the Democratic Party line over the course of his nearly 10 years in the Senate. That's just not changing now.

well this aged well. Any comment?

Well, last I checked, I missed the part where he's confirmed to be casting a deciding vote against the Democratic Party line by taking this stand, so my comment would be to f**king wait:

Remember guys, Manchin literally never votes against the party line when it matters, and it's stupid and naive to think that he will. I'm sure that he's only doing this because he knows there are loads of Republicans to pad the margin.

(This is sarcastic in case you can't tell)

Y'all, can we calm the f**k down for literally 5 seconds & just wait & see how this plays out a bit more. It's entirely possible that he's been told Tanden has at least 1 Republican vote (so, literally pick 1 of your Romneys, Murkowskis, Collins', etc.) & that this is therefore not a time where his vote actually matters. But thank you for your failed attempt at a burn, though, very cool!

Maybe (I highly doubt it), but I do note that Manchin is announcing this ahead of any R publicly saying they're a yes.

The problem with Manchin is that we should not have to get down on our knees and beg Murkowski (here) or the Budget Committee (in the case of the budget amendments that he provided deciding votes for) to cover for his misbehavior. He should know enough to provide the desired result himself.

I'm honestly sick and tired of treating someone who voted with Trump more often than not, voted for 80% of his judges, and already has or plans to cast several deciding votes against the dems in this congress, as a Democrat. We need to kick him out of the caucus.

I was following until the last paragraph. How in God's name would deliberately making McConnell Majority Leader again just to teach Manchin a lesson or whatever be preferable to the current situation?

Seeing the forest for the trees really is just too hard an undertaking for some people. Letting the perfect be the enemy of the good is apparently what matters more, if not all that matters.