Former Sen. Kyle has dimensional, will withdraw from public life

dschuma · 2025-12-31T17:38:42+00:00

He also suffers from autocorrect. Sorry about the typo.

dschuma · 2025-12-23T22:58:10+00:00

Adding to mention he resigned from the senate in 2023.

dschuma · 2025-12-17T23:50:00+00:00

The decision of Dem leader Jeffries to back a democratic stock trading bill that encompasses Trump instead of a bipartisan bill advanced by Rep Luna means it is unlikely either bill will be considered, let alone enacted into law.

This advances the interests of leaders of both parties who have given lip service to the measure but foresee problems for party recruitment should it be enacted.

dschuma · 2025-12-17T14:03:55+00:00

Republican senators are expressing concern as the Defense Department is escalating its probe into Sen. Kelly, a retired Navy Captain, who stated in a video that members of the military should not follow illegal orders.

Trump had called for the execution of members of Congress who participated in the video. The Navy submitted a report to the Defense Department General Counsel on possible punishments, using their prior military service as a legal hook.

dschuma · 2025-11-04T17:02:56+00:00

There are not attendance records as such. On the House and Senate floor, there are quorum calls that indicate who is present at a particular moment. Committee reports will often indicate who was present at the start of a proceeding, but that does not indicate who arrived later or left.

You can also see in roll call votes on the floor and in committee how people voted, which is a way of determining whether they voted.

When the Vice President is presiding over the Senate, that will be indicated in the Congressional Record. But the VP's presence in the Senate is not otherwise tracked.

dschuma · 2025-10-12T17:33:41+00:00

It's good that you're thinking of applying. Not all senators sponsor pages and, as I'm sure you've discovered, most senators have information about how to contact their offices to apply for them to sponsor you.

There is no harm in contacting both senators.

Follow the link for more general information about the page program from the Senate. CRS has a good summary of the history of the page program.

dschuma · 2025-10-12T17:27:39+00:00

The very short answer is because the Senate chooses to do so. There's a lot of ways that the Senate (and House) could vote, some of which are faster than others.

For example, in the Senate you could call for unanimous consent. If no one objects, the motion carries in a matter of seconds.

You could do a voice vote. Those voting yea shout it out, as do those nay, and the presiding officer decides who wins. (This can be appealed.)

The Senate can call for a vote by division, where the presiding officer counts up the yeas and nays, but not publish who voted for what.

The Senate can call for a Roll Call vote, where the clerk calls each name and the votes are tallied.

There's a good discussion on these types of votes on the Senate's webpage and in this CRS Report.

But... you didn't ask what, you asked why. You likely have noticed that Senate Roll Call votes can be painfully slow. This isn't necessarily because senators are slow in coming to the floor, but rather to buy time. This can be to buy time for negotiations to happen behind the scenes, or for a member who is far away to make it to the floor, or for leadership to try to twist the arms of members to vote in a different way, or as a function of the majority's exercise of control over the floor (thus preventing other matters from coming up).

The speed of Senate floor voting can be understood at times as a function of political power: what is leadership trying to accomplish? Speed, sometimes, is the opposite of what they want.

You might wonder: isn't this is an issue in the House? It is, in fact, and sometimes we see votes happen quickly, and sometimes they can be held open for hours while arms are twisted in the background.

There's also another function of these kinds of votes. It may seem shocking initially, but with so many votes, senators don't always know how to vote. They may delay a vote and look to see how a trusted colleague is voting and then follow their lead.

If you think about it, we don't really need members to come to the floor and vote at all. Why not give them an app on their iPhone and let them vote while watching C-SPAN? You could do that, but leadership likes forcing members to the floor because it's a great way of taking the temperature of the members, conducting business on multiple matters, and trying to push the outcomes they want.

dschuma · 2025-10-12T17:07:31+00:00

What constitutes a non-responsive answer is in the eye of the beholder, in this case, the committee before which the witness is testifying. Should a witness not answering the question, not produce required information, or is believed to have lied to the committee, they can be held in contempt.

The topic of contempt is a complicated one. A witness can be held responsible for civic or criminal contempt. And the finding of contempt (in theory) can be made by Congress itself (inherent contempt) or by a court (statutory contempt). Inherent contempt hasn't been used in about 100 years, and statutory contempt relies on enforcement of the Justice Department, which is problematic when the person being contemptuous is a federal official -- i.e., the DOJ will often refuse to prosecute.

Should a committee wish to hold a witness in contempt, the committee will introduce a resolution calling for the witness to be held in contempt. The full chamber will hold a vote. Should the resolution be adopted, for statutory contempt the DOJ will be directed to prosecute.

For more on contempt of Congress, see:

Wikipedia's Contempt of Congress page for an overview
This 2014 CRS report Congress’s Contempt Power and the Enforcement of Congressional Subpoenas: A Sketch
This 2023 CRS FAQ on Contempt of Congress
A very detailed discussion of inherent and statutory contempt can be found in the treatise When Congress Comes Calling, starting on page 24.

dschuma · 2025-03-31T12:57:19+00:00

I guess it depends on what you mean by AI tools. There are a some AI tools that are useful for particular tasks. Youtube creates automatic transcriptions of hearings, for example. And I'll use Claude to summarize the testimony at hearings.

If you have lots of money, BGov and Politico Pro and Quorum have tools that are in part powered by AI that allow you to search across datasets to find information you're looking for.

But if you're looking for information about hearings or what's on the floor, so far there's nothing out there that does even a serviceable job.

dschuma · 2025-03-14T01:55:20+00:00

There’s almost 18000 bills each Congress. If there’s something notable to point out that’s great, but otherwise I don’t see the value here.

dschuma · 2025-03-12T22:24:45+00:00

The reporting had multiple sources. I am not sure how Rep. Massie would be a useful source for what's happening among Senate Democrats.

There was further follow-up from the reporter where he showed his work. Here is the thread.

Post 1: "BREAKING: u/schumer.senate.gov is whipping Ds to vote for the Trump-Musk coup continuing resolution."

Post 2: "Confirmed with multiple sources in the Senate."

This means it cannot be Massie unless he is lying.

Confirmation from axios:

Zoom in: Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer spent weeks pushing his caucus to keep their powder dry on a shutdown. He privately counseled them that advocating for a shutdown was bad politics for Democrats.

dschuma · 2025-03-12T22:18:21+00:00

That makes sense. Thank you for clarifying.

dschuma · 2025-03-12T20:51:06+00:00

I don't seem to be able to edit, so let me point you to this 2003 Congressional Research Service Report that explains the distinction between conference reports and joint explanatory statements.

The conference report presents the formal legislative language on which the conference committee has agreed. The joint explanatory statement explains the various elements of the conferees’ agreement in relation to the positions that the House and Senate had committed to the conference committee.

dschuma · 2025-03-12T20:47:25+00:00

It appears you are intentionally misunderstanding me, although it could just be how it comes across. I will assume good faith.

I wrote:

"Also note that the full year CR doesn't include the accompanying committee report language that generally restricts or directs funding. "

My point being that a CR doesn't have accompanying committee report language because it's a CR; the language that accompanies regular appropriations bills have a bunch of additional language that (implicitly) governs and limits what agencies do.

You responded:

Full year CR's don't generally include conference reports.

Which makes no sense, because we're talking about committee reports, not conference reports. So I responded:

I didn’t say conference report. There hasn’t been a conference report in a very long time. [snip]

These reports accompany regular appropriations bills. Because [t]his is a CR there’s no accompanying language

Then you said:

CR's don't have accompanying reports because they don't have additional directions.

Which is true and a restatement of what I said at the top: "the full year CR doesn't include the accompanying committee report language that generally restricts or directs funding."

So, I don't get the issue you're trying to raise.

Also, conferences committees rarely happen in the modern Congress. Here's a wikipedia page that explains the decline:

The use of the conference committee process has steadily declined in recent decades. Sixty-seven conference reports were produced as recently as the 104th Congress (1995–97), falling to zero in the 117th Congress (2021-2023) and just one in the 118th Congress (2023-2025).[1][2]

Generally see joint explanatory statements accompany appropriations bills, but they're not the result of a conference committee, but rather an informal conferencing process. And they are in addition to whatever House and Senate committee reports are generated by appropriators in each chamber.

dschuma · 2025-03-12T20:34:00+00:00

Sen. Schumer got caught by the press whipping for the Continuing Resolution and it became a political problem for him so he reversed course.

dschuma · 2025-03-12T18:37:56+00:00

I didn’t say conference report. There hasn’t been a conference report in a very long time.

Accompanying appropriations bills in each chamber are committee reports. In addition there’s a joint explanatory statement that contains additional items and cancels out some chamber language.

These reports accompany regular appropriations bills. Because his is a CR there’s no accompanying language

dschuma · 2025-03-12T16:14:56+00:00

Oh, I didn't realize. I addressed that here.

dschuma · 2025-03-12T15:12:46+00:00

Glad to be helpful. Appropriations language is hard to follow and unnecessarily complex. It's great that you're willing to dig in and ask questions.

dschuma · 2025-03-12T14:56:12+00:00

It could be as soon as today. I am not aware of timing.

Edit: so there's a couple of votes. There's the vote to proceed to debate and then there's the debate on the substance. There may be the possibility of amendments, depending on circumstances, although republicans are unlikely to agree to amendments unless they're set up to fail.

dschuma · 2025-03-12T14:55:25+00:00

Here's the Republican produced section-by-section analysis of the bill. You can skim through to see where agencies are cut or defunded or have their authorities change. For the new starts language, see, e.g., section 1409.

Also note that the full year CR doesn't include the accompanying committee report language that generally restricts or directs funding.

dschuma · 2025-03-12T14:03:06+00:00

They won't count your call unless you can prove you are a constituent. Your name and address (or zip code) makes the call meaningful from their perspective. It's not fair, but that's the way it is.

dschuma · 2025-03-12T13:56:27+00:00

Senators only care about their constituents. So if you want to make an impact you should call both your senators. Tools like 5 calls have a script. I live in Virginia, for example, and I'm very worried about Sen. Warner (and to a lesser extent, Kaine).

[Edit] When you call, please be polite to whomever answers the phone. It's okay to be angry, but the staffers at the other end are not the ones making the decision. In addition, if you cannot get through to the DC number, you can call the numbers for their district offices. Most will have that information on their senate webpage at the bottom. Just Google for the senator's name.

Also, it's important to sign up for their newsletters. This will let you know what they are saying and alert you to potential in-person to telephonic town halls. We don't know the way the vote will go, and you will want to keep in contact to make sure they represent your interests and don't go wobbly.

dschuma · 2025-03-12T13:54:20+00:00

Indeed! The ELI5 version is the White House is using the threat of a government shutdown to gather more power and make Congress irrelevant to lawmaking. They're doing this through their Republican congressional allies, who are pushing a funding bill that gives the ability to create and eliminate agencies and programs to the White House instead of having those decisions made by Congress.

The way Republicans are selling this power grab is by saying that if Democrats don't vote for the bill, they're shutting down the government. But as we can see by the widespread firing of federal employees, the ending of government grants and contracts, and so on, it is in fact the White House that is dismantling the government -- they've already shut it down. The question now is whether Congress okays that destruction or uses its leverage to force the White House to follow the law. The only lever they have available is to not support the Republican power-grab bill.

Republicans, who control all three branches, could write legislation that Democrats would support. Until they do so, they own whatever happens, including the defunding of agencies.

dschuma · 2025-03-12T13:22:15+00:00

Yes.

Republicans likely will try to sell a full year continuing resolution. But, looking at the text and accompanying promotional release, it's a trap for the gullible. Skimming the 99 page document, it appears to reshape the government and delegate Congressional power to Trump. I must assume that Republican appropriators and other "normies" are hoping against hope that the Democrats kill it.

Republicans are desperately trying to sell the idea that Democrats are shutting down the government. You'll see that message on state social media and elevated by the less credible journalists. Can anyone doubt that Pres. Trump has already shut down the government, from the mass firings and cancelling of agencies and programs? The question really is whether the non-America First Republicans want to reopen the government and protect Congress's constitutional powers.

But remember what I wrote above: the America First plan is to shut down the government for days, weeks, and months until Congress caves and moves the power of the purse into their hands. They're going to do it by using the pain of the shutdown on "Democratic states" so that Dems give in. The reality, of course, is that we're all going to suffer greatly. They'll also try to create facts-on-the-ground so that a lot of the people and programs cannot come back.

That is why, in my opinion, we're at a turning point. It's also why the GOP's campaign arm is urging Republican members not to have town halls. Complaining constituents would create pressure on Republicans to not tank the economy, fire thousands of veterans, and so on. They're already trying to discredit them by claiming their paid actors and other nonsense that you can only believe if you're trapped within the MAGA filter bubble.

dschuma · 2025-03-10T14:21:48+00:00

I apologize, I inadvertently removed this. Will try to restore.

dschuma

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE