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

[Sir Mohamed]

What exactly was the problem with Vilsack? I mean the opposition to him in this forum. Did he do a poor job during the Obama Admin?

[Gracile]

What are Tanden's chances now? This latest move by the Budget and Homeland Security committees doesn't seem like a great sign for her, although Biden's people are still behind her and seem unlikely to pull her nomination.

[South Dakota Democrat]

What are Tanden's chances now? This latest move by the Budget and Homeland Security committees doesn't seem like a great sign for her, although Biden's people are still behind her and seem unlikely to pull her nomination.

That's what they say publicly, but pretty sure they'll pull the nomination soon. Your mistake is taking what they say publicly at face value.

[Gracile]

What are Tanden's chances now? This latest move by the Budget and Homeland Security committees doesn't seem like a great sign for her, although Biden's people are still behind her and seem unlikely to pull her nomination.

That's what they say publicly, but pretty sure they'll pull the nomination soon. Your mistake is taking what they say publicly at face value.

That's what I thought (this move by the committees seems like the first step in getting her nomination pulled), but I was just wondering if she had any other possible path - which seems highly unlikely at this point.

[NewYorkExpress]

Mitch McConnell says he will vote for Merrick Garland to be the next Attorney General

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell will vote to confirm Merrick Garland as the next attorney general, five years after refusing to act on Garland's nomination to the Supreme Court.


A McConnell spokesperson confirmed to CBS News that the Kentucky Republican supports President Biden's pick to lead the Justice Department. Politico first reported his decision on Tuesday.

Garland was nominated to the Supreme Court by former President Barack Obama in 2016, after the death of Justice Antonin Scalia. McConnell refused to consider Garland's nomination, arguing that the Senate should not fill a Supreme Court seat during an election year, and instead let the American people decide. After the GOP won the White House, the Republican-controlled Senate filled the vacant seat with Supreme Court Justice Neil Gorsuch in 2017, the first of three justices nominated to the bench by former President Donald Trump.

Well, this is interesting. I would thought McConnell would be a no vote on this one, given his, like most Republicans, loyal support of Trump. In fact, I thought the Republicans would be unanimously against anyone Biden nominated to the Justice Department.

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

They’re gonna let Tanden “withdraw to avoid being a distraction” rather than having Biden pull the nomination himself as is customary.

[Sir Mohamed]

Mitch McConnell says he will vote for Merrick Garland to be the next Attorney General

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell will vote to confirm Merrick Garland as the next attorney general, five years after refusing to act on Garland's nomination to the Supreme Court.


A McConnell spokesperson confirmed to CBS News that the Kentucky Republican supports President Biden's pick to lead the Justice Department. Politico first reported his decision on Tuesday.

Garland was nominated to the Supreme Court by former President Barack Obama in 2016, after the death of Justice Antonin Scalia. McConnell refused to consider Garland's nomination, arguing that the Senate should not fill a Supreme Court seat during an election year, and instead let the American people decide. After the GOP won the White House, the Republican-controlled Senate filled the vacant seat with Supreme Court Justice Neil Gorsuch in 2017, the first of three justices nominated to the bench by former President Donald Trump.

Well, this is interesting. I would thought McConnell would be a no vote on this one, given his, like most Republicans, loyal support of Trump. In fact, I thought the Republicans would be unanimously against anyone Biden nominated to the Justice Department.

Didn't McConnell actually vote for most of Biden's nominees so far?

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

What exactly was the problem with Vilsack? I mean the opposition to him in this forum. Did he do a poor job during the Obama Admin?

Way too close to big agribusiness and apparently a poor record on racial injustices within the agriculture sector, although the latter is true of almost ever recent ag secretary. iirc even the Daily Yonder has been critical of him, and they usually have a center-to-center-left editorial line.

[NewYorkExpress]

Mitch McConnell says he will vote for Merrick Garland to be the next Attorney General

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell will vote to confirm Merrick Garland as the next attorney general, five years after refusing to act on Garland's nomination to the Supreme Court.


A McConnell spokesperson confirmed to CBS News that the Kentucky Republican supports President Biden's pick to lead the Justice Department. Politico first reported his decision on Tuesday.

Garland was nominated to the Supreme Court by former President Barack Obama in 2016, after the death of Justice Antonin Scalia. McConnell refused to consider Garland's nomination, arguing that the Senate should not fill a Supreme Court seat during an election year, and instead let the American people decide. After the GOP won the White House, the Republican-controlled Senate filled the vacant seat with Supreme Court Justice Neil Gorsuch in 2017, the first of three justices nominated to the bench by former President Donald Trump.

Well, this is interesting. I would thought McConnell would be a no vote on this one, given his, like most Republicans, loyal support of Trump. In fact, I thought the Republicans would be unanimously against anyone Biden nominated to the Justice Department.

Didn't McConnell actually vote for most of Biden's nominees so far?

Yes, but again, I thought he, like pretty much every other Republican, would be a no vote against any Biden nominee as Attorney General.

[ηєω ƒяσηтιєя]

What exactly was the problem with Vilsack? I mean the opposition to him in this forum. Did he do a poor job during the Obama Admin?

https://mobile.twitter.com/politico/status/1336845656288333824

His ties to Monsanto are also a problem. Then, there's the fact that he was already AgSec for 8 years, did he really need to be re-nominated? Biden should have chose someone else.

[brucejoel99]

What exactly was the problem with Vilsack? I mean the opposition to him in this forum. Did he do a poor job during the Obama Admin?

https://mobile.twitter.com/politico/status/1336845656288333824

His ties to Monsanto are also a problem. Then, there's the fact that he was already AgSec for 8 years, did he really need to be re-nominated? Biden should have chose someone else.

I understand policy-based concerns & the like being the potential impetus for opposing a nominee, & those are totally fair, but is the bolded really a fair concern? If the President believes that they did a good job & they obviously only previously left the job because the White House had changed hands, then why shouldn't it be fair for the President to put them back in the role?

[ηєω ƒяσηтιєя]

What exactly was the problem with Vilsack? I mean the opposition to him in this forum. Did he do a poor job during the Obama Admin?

https://mobile.twitter.com/politico/status/1336845656288333824

His ties to Monsanto are also a problem. Then, there's the fact that he was already AgSec for 8 years, did he really need to be re-nominated? Biden should have chose someone else.

I understand policy-based concerns & the like being the potential impetus for opposing a nominee, & those are totally fair, but is the bolded really a fair concern? If the President believes that they did a good job & they obviously only previously left the job because the White House had changed hands, then why shouldn't it be fair for the President to put them back in the role?

Yes. Especially when Biden said that he would have a "Cabinet that looks like America". Did he have to re-nominate his "friend" when he could have nominate someone new? It makes it even worse because according to Biden, Vilsack didn't want to be AgSec again but Biden begged him to accept - and Vilsack relented.

Furthermore, Biden didn't nominate an AAPI person to be a Cabinet Secretary. An Asian AgSec would have been a historic first.

[brucejoel99]

What exactly was the problem with Vilsack? I mean the opposition to him in this forum. Did he do a poor job during the Obama Admin?

https://mobile.twitter.com/politico/status/1336845656288333824

His ties to Monsanto are also a problem. Then, there's the fact that he was already AgSec for 8 years, did he really need to be re-nominated? Biden should have chose someone else.

I understand policy-based concerns & the like being the potential impetus for opposing a nominee, & those are totally fair, but is the bolded really a fair concern? If the President believes that they did a good job & they obviously only previously left the job because the White House had changed hands, then why shouldn't it be fair for the President to put them back in the role?

Yes. Especially when Biden said that he would have a "Cabinet that looks like America". Did he have to re-nominate his "friend" when he could have nominate someone new? It makes it even worse because according to Biden, Vilsack didn't want to be AgSec again but Biden begged him to accept - and Vilsack relented.

Furthermore, Biden didn't nominate an AAPI person to be a Cabinet Secretary. An Asian AgSec would have been a historic first.

Wanting a(n even more) diverse cabinet is yet another fair concern, yes, but that doesn't exactly answer my question, as it's not the same thing as one of the cons of a nominee merely being that they already held the job.

[ηєω ƒяσηтιєя]

Wanting an (even more) diverse cabinet is yet another fair concern, yes, but that doesn't exactly answer my question, as it's not the same thing as one of the cons of a nominee merely being that they already held the job.

Well, in my opinion it is a con. But we'll agree to disgrace.

My biggest problems with Vilsack was his treatment of Black famers and Black officials in the USDA (in particular, Shirley Sherrod) and his ties to Monsanto.

[BudgieForce]

I was under the impression Vilsack hated being Agriculture Secretary and Biden had to beg him to take the position a second time.

[brucejoel99]

I was under the impression Vilsack hated being Agriculture Secretary and Biden had to beg him to take the position a second time.

IIRC, what he hated was being given & having nothing to do as Ag. Sec. the 1st time around, which led to him even threatening to resign 'til Obama put him in charge of rural opioid issues. This time around, I'm sure Biden promised him that having nothing to do wouldn't be the case, not least because the USDA has a major role to play as part of the COVID relief apparatus, what with their food assistance expansion, rural housing programs, farm loan debt assistance, rural vaccinations, farm rescue payment program, etc.

[ηєω ƒяσηтιєя]

I was under the impression Vilsack hated being Agriculture Secretary and Biden had to beg him to take the position a second time.

That is correct:

“He wasn’t anxious to come back, he wasn’t looking for this job, but I was persistent and I asked him to serve again in this role because he knows the USDA inside and out, he knows the government inside and out,” Biden said of Vilsack, who turns 70 this weekend, as he introduced him and other members of his future Cabinet on Friday. “We need that experience now.”

SOURCE: https://apnews.com/article/joe-biden-race-and-ethnicity-iowa-coronavirus-pandemic-financial-markets-fb52ce4a722219fe6b3a513d619ab6f4

[politics_king]

It may be a stop gap right now. My guess in Biden and his team's thinking is how to make sure the factories and farming are covid safe and how we will deal with the next pandemic. Set the wheels in motion, I'd pay more attention to who will be the deputy. With that said, he should've nominated Fudge.

[ηєω ƒяσηтιєя]

It may be a stop gap right now. My guess in Biden and his team's thinking is how to make sure the factories and farming are covid safe and how we will deal with the next pandemic. Set the wheels in motion, I'd pay more attention to who will be the deputy. With that said, he should've nominated Fudge.

Biden nominated Dr. Jewel H. Bronaugh to be Deputy AgSec. She is the commissioner of the Virginia Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services. She's also a Black woman.

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

Whatever you think of him, Vilsack did have reputation for knowing every inch of the USDA inside out and being at least as knowledgeable about it as anyone else to hold the post in recent history.

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

Seems like Manchin's still happy with Haaland after her second hearing. He thanked her today for "being so diligent and doing such a good job".

[Calthrina950]

It's astounding to me how long the confirmation process has been dragging on. Biden has been in office for over a month now, and a significant portion of his Cabinet (Haaland, Fudge, Garland) have yet to be confirmed. Hopefully things will wrap up within the next few weeks, both on the nominations and with regards to the stimulus bill.

[BudgieForce]

Seems like Manchin's still happy with Haaland after her second hearing. He thanked her today for "being so diligent and doing such a good job".

I think that fact that Haaland has been adamant about fulfilling Biden's agenda and not her own has really helped calm fears. I'd be pretty shocked if Manchin comes out against her all things considered.

[AndyHogan14]

Guzman received a 15-5 vote today by the Small Business Committee. She has now been added to the logjam waiting for a full Senate vote.

[BudgieForce]

https://twitter.com/Phil_Mattingly/status/1364671596833738752

Manchin is a YES on Haaland.