Read on Twitter
With a Biden presidency increasingly likely, the McConnell-veto-over-Biden-nominees story line is starting to crop up here and there. https://www.axios.com/gop-senate-biden-transition-50ebe6c8-e318-4fdb-b903-048908b3b954.html
But the scenario painted in these pieces isn’t likely to occur
1. McConnell has a long-record of pushing to confirm Democratic nominees over Republican/conservative opposition.
Majority leader McConnell opposed conservative efforts to follow the Senate’s rules instead of Harry Reid’s nuclear option precedent that violated those rules. McConnell did so to make it easier for the Senate to confirm Obama’s AG nominee, Loretta Lynch. https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/239938-mcconnell-whipped-for-lynch-avoiding-nuclear-fallout
2. The Senate majority and minority leaders work together to schedule nominees for floor consideration and have long opposed efforts by rank-and-file senators to get in on the game. Look for McConnell and Schumer to continue this trend.
3. McConnell devoted a lot of floor time in the final weeks of the 116th Congress before the election to confirming judges that a majority of his party, including conservatives, opposed. McConnell unlikely to block cabinet R noms while pushing D judicial noms.
4. Asssuming that McConnell does try to block Biden’s cabinet picks, he doesn’t have a veto. Schumer demonstrated that any senator can make motions to proceed to Senate business, including nominees.
Motions to proceed to the executive calendar to consider cabinet nominees are not debatable. That means that when a senator (any senator) makes one, there is a vote. If that vote fails, it isn’t accurate to say McConnell vetoed the nominee. The Senate decided to do other things.
To sum up, there is no scenario under the rules in which McConnell has the power to veto a president’s cabinet nominees. And McConnell’s record on presidential nominations suggests that he will not try to block Biden’s nominees early next year.
Of course, there is Garland.
But Garland happened at the end of a presidency, not at the beginning (and McConnell likely arguing in private that you can’t not have a Secretary of the Treasury, etc. for four years- remember, he was privately conceding that Garland should be confirmed if Clinton won in 2016)
Also, conservatives had to push McConnell to adopt the no-vote-on-Garland position- something he did rapidly. But the effort did not originate with McConnell.
And Democrats could have forced action on Garland had they wanted to. If Reid did so early on, Republican blockade would have likely crumbled, as there were not 51 Republicans who supported blocking Garland for much of the debate.
So add up the timing of the nominations, McConnell’s past record, and the reality of the Senate rule - you don’t get a McConnell veto. McConnell-world rumblings here are merely an effort to appear relevant, remind world he is still there, and perhaps to influence Biden picks.
