Editor,
In his letter published Jan. 8, “Let’s get centered,” Joe Guttenbeil wished Daily Journal readers a ‘Happy New Year’ and encouraged a return to the ‘political middle’ for the new year.
Editor,
In his letter published Jan. 8, “Let’s get centered,” Joe Guttenbeil wished Daily Journal readers a ‘Happy New Year’ and encouraged a return to the ‘political middle’ for the new year.
It reminded me of an op-ed published in The New York Times on New Year’s Day by Rep. Tom Suozzi, D-NY, “Let’s Try Something Different in How We Deal With Trump.” Suozzi encouraged his colleagues “to break away from the restrictive orthodox ideologies of some of the more extreme members of the Democrats’ Progressive Caucus and the Republicans’ Freedom Caucus.”
On Jan. 10, an Associated Press article published on page 6 of the Daily Journal reported on the advancement of bipartisan immigration and public safety legislation in the Senate that appeared to me to be what Guttenbeil and Suozzi had in mind.
“Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer and most other Democrats voted to proceed with [S.5 - Laken Riley Act], advancing the bill 84-9,” reported Mary Clare Jalonick. The bill, “named after a “Georgia nursing student Laken Riley [who] was killed last year by a Venezuelan man who entered the U.S. illegally and was allowed to stay to pursue his immigration case,” Jalonick said. It “would require federal authorities to detain unauthorized immigrants who have been accused of certain crimes.”
California Sens. Adam Schiff and Alex Padilla were among only six senators who had not voted on the cloture motions on Jan. 9 and Jan. 13. Apparently they are reluctant to “get centered.”
Irvin Dawid
Burlingame
Please purchase a Premium Subscription to continue reading.
To continue, please log in, or sign up for a new account.
We offer one free story view per month. If you register for an account, you will get two additional story views. After those three total views, we ask that you support us with a subscription.
A subscription to our digital content is so much more than just access to our valuable content. It means you’re helping to support a local community institution that has, from its very start, supported the betterment of our society. Thank you very much!
Only subscribers can view and post comments on articles.
Already a subscriber? Login Here
Sorry, an error occurred.
Already Subscribed!
Cancel anytime
Thank you .
Your account has been registered, and you are now logged in.
Check your email for details.
Submitting this form below will send a message to your email with a link to change your password.
An email message containing instructions on how to reset your password has been sent to the email address listed on your account.
No promotional rates found.
Secure & Encrypted
Thank you.
Your gift purchase was successful! Your purchase was successful, and you are now logged in.
| Rate: | |
| Begins: | |
| Transaction ID: |
A receipt was sent to your email.
(4) comments
A belated Happy New Year, Mr. Dawid. Thanks for your letter and your observations on cloture votes for the Laken Riley Act. Perhaps for these two it’s not a “getting centered” matter but more of a “we don’t care enough to vote” matter. If senators don’t care enough to vote during cloture, does this mean they’re not allowed to vote during the full vote to pass or fail the Laken Riley Act? I’d say they shouldn’t be allowed. BTW, a few more days to see if your prediction of Biden resigning so Harris can become president will become true. I don’t think it’ll happen. I get the feeling Jill won’t allow Joe to do so.
A belated Happy New Year to you too, Terence.
Frankly I don't know the answer to your procedural question about withholding one's vote on cloture motions. I interpreted as a way to stay neutral rather than a 'yes' or 'no.'
Did you see that the bill passed a key Senate requirement yesterday?
https://www.axios.com/2025/01/17/laken-riley-act-clears-critical-senate-hurdle
Hi Irvin, thanks for your response and the link. I just checked and senators are allowed to vote on all iterations, including changing their vote. S. 5 has proceeded through 5 vote counts, including two amendments. Both Schiff and Padilla did not vote on the two cloture motions you detailed and were on the “losing” side of the other 3 vote counts. I get the feeling this legislation may be the first Trump signs, while also signing a reported 100 Executive Orders. BTW, it sounds like your interpretation of a withheld vote as a neutral is correct.
Hi Terence,
Thanks for reporting on the Senate votes on the LR Act, which, according to Axios, is expected to pass on Monday! I thought it was a legal holiday, plus Inauguration Day.
"Senate Majority Leader John Thune notched his first big win Friday by clearing the filibuster on the Laken Riley Act. It'll almost certainly pass Monday with ease."
https://www.axios.com/2025/01/17/thune-gets-his-first-big-win
However, I see that they will vote on an amendment by Joni Ernst on Monday as well, and then it goes back to the House.
This will be a huge win for the soon-to-be president as well as the 119th Congress. Hopefully we'll see more cooperation like this on future bills.
Welcome to the discussion.
Log In
Keep the discussion civilized. Absolutely NO personal attacks or insults directed toward writers, nor others who make comments.
Keep it clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd, racist or sexually-oriented language.
Don't threaten. Threats of harming another person will not be tolerated.
Be truthful. Don't knowingly lie about anyone or anything.
Be proactive. Use the 'Report' link on each comment to let us know of abusive posts.
PLEASE TURN OFF YOUR CAPS LOCK.
Anyone violating these rules will be issued a warning. After the warning, comment privileges can be revoked.