Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: All those DUers who claimed that [View all]lapucelle
(20,748 posts)72. Scott asked for unanimous consent to proceed with consideration of the resolution. A quorum wasn't present.
That means that either all of the Democrats and some of the Republicans were not in the chamber or that some Democrats and some Republicans were not there. Either way, at least 51 senators appear to have skipped the shit show.
Senate rules presume a quorum in legislative session. Scott (R) ("notwithstanding rule XXII" ) was careful not to invoke cloture. At the end of his ridiculous speech, Tuberville (R), suggested the absence of a quorum (most likely a procedural move), a roll call was ordered and then stopped when Lankford (R) asked for unanimous consent for the quorum call to be rescinded. The resolution was "approved" by a voice vote of those present in the chamber.
From the Congressional Record:
Mr. SCOTT of Florida: Mr. President, as if in legislative session and notwithstanding rule XXII, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the consideration of S. Res. 403, which was submitted earlier today.
snip-------------------------------------------
Mr. Tuberville: I suggest the absence of a quorum.
The PRESIDING OFFICER: The clerk will call the roll.
The senior assistant executive clerk proceeded to call the roll.
Mr. LANKFORD: Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr.MORENO): Without objection, it is so ordered
snip-------------------------------------------
Mr. Tuberville: I suggest the absence of a quorum.
The PRESIDING OFFICER: The clerk will call the roll.
The senior assistant executive clerk proceeded to call the roll.
Mr. LANKFORD: Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr.MORENO): Without objection, it is so ordered
https://www.congress.gov/congressional-record/volume-171/issue-153/senate-section/article/S6713-1
=================================
Voting and Quorum Procedures in the Senate
The Constitution states that "a Majority of each [House] shall constitute a quorum to do business." The Senate presumes that it is complying with this requirement and that a quorum is always present unless and until the absence of a quorum is suggested or demonstrated. This presumption allows the Senate to conduct its business on the floor with fewer than 51 Senators present until a Senator "suggests the absence of a quorum."
Except when the Senate has invoked cloture, the presiding officer may not count to determine if a quorum is present. When the absence of a quorum is suggested, therefore, the presiding officer directs the Clerk to call the roll. The Senate cannot resume its business until a majority of Senators respond to the quorum call or unless, by unanimous consent, "further proceedings under the quorum call are dispensed with" before the last Senator's name has been called. If a quorum fails to respond, the Senate may adjourn or take steps necessary to secure the attendance of enough Senators to constitute a quorum. It usually takes the latter course by agreeing to a motion that instructs the Sergeant at Arms to request the attendance of absent Senators.
The Constitution states that "a Majority of each [House] shall constitute a quorum to do business." The Senate presumes that it is complying with this requirement and that a quorum is always present unless and until the absence of a quorum is suggested or demonstrated. This presumption allows the Senate to conduct its business on the floor with fewer than 51 Senators present until a Senator "suggests the absence of a quorum."
Except when the Senate has invoked cloture, the presiding officer may not count to determine if a quorum is present. When the absence of a quorum is suggested, therefore, the presiding officer directs the Clerk to call the roll. The Senate cannot resume its business until a majority of Senators respond to the quorum call or unless, by unanimous consent, "further proceedings under the quorum call are dispensed with" before the last Senator's name has been called. If a quorum fails to respond, the Senate may adjourn or take steps necessary to secure the attendance of enough Senators to constitute a quorum. It usually takes the latter course by agreeing to a motion that instructs the Sergeant at Arms to request the attendance of absent Senators.
https://www.congress.gov/crs-product/96-452

Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):
74 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations

I just saw that news and am sick to my stomach as well as in a very unforgiving mood. -eom
vanessa_ca
Friday
#1
Glad to hear some Democrats choosing to lower tensions a bit, even though they know they'll be eaten and bashed.
Silent Type
Friday
#6
So where is the base going? I think it was a smart move, but yeah some are going to bash them like Obama and
Silent Type
Friday
#10
Taking your eye off the prize is a loser too. I'd much rather win House in midterms than bash Kirk and Dems
Silent Type
Friday
#14
If trump had lost in 2016, he wouldn't have been elected in 2024. But thanks for comment.
Silent Type
Friday
#30
The base is going to watch what we're doing right now, and use it as the basis for what we'll do in the future.
Lancero
Sunday
#67
I just remembered Liz Cheney. Harris got cooties from Never Trumpers, for doing politics and using allies
betsuni
Sunday
#74
"UNANIMOUS Passage of Resolution Designating October 14th National Day of Remembrance for Charlie Kirk"
vanessa_ca
Friday
#11
Not willing to sacrifice anything, but yapping ain't gonna change anything and will cost us votes.
Silent Type
Friday
#37
Scott asked for unanimous consent to proceed with consideration of the resolution. A quorum wasn't present.
lapucelle
Sunday
#72
Well, let's just take Kirk Remembrance Day to actually remember who and what he was
William Seger
Friday
#25
I think there is some confusion here. There was a resolution in the house and one in the Senate.
Quiet Em
Friday
#43
It appears that there was not a quorum on the Senate floor when Scott initially called for unanimous consent.
lapucelle
Sunday
#62
As for the House resolution, Jamie Raskin voted YES and urged Democratic collegues to do the same.
lapucelle
Sunday
#63
Although the original vote was a voice vote, Republican Andy Biggs made a motion for the roll to be called
lapucelle
Sunday
#65
The House resolution honored Kirk and called for an end to all political violence. The Senate reolution was different.
lapucelle
Sunday
#68
It can and will be weaponized against certain Democrats even though it is otherwise meaningless
Wiz Imp
Friday
#46
The resolution also called for an end to all political violence. Jamie Raskin recognized it as a trap.
lapucelle
Sunday
#70
Senate Democrats did not vote unanimously for the Republican's Charlie Kirk Day stunt
Quiet Em
Friday
#45
*rubs hands together, types furiously* OMG DEMOCRATS YOU PEOPLE ALLOWING FASCISM CONSPIRACY!!!!!!!111
betsuni
Friday
#51
Amazing how many knee jerked opinions before we found out that they did not vote for. Apologies anyone? Or delete your
Srkdqltr
Friday
#54
Rule: Instantly assume the worst, assume the worst motivations, never ever give one second benefit of the doubt.
betsuni
Friday
#56