Speaker 1: We are going to turn to the history that is
Speaker 1: happening right now in the U. S. Senate, where Republicans
Speaker 1: have approved what everyone is calling the nuclear option. It
Speaker 1: clears the way for Neil Gorsuch to be confirmed to
Speaker 1: the Supreme Court with only a simple majority of fifty
Speaker 1: one votes. That means the Senate fifty two Republicans don't
Speaker 1: need any Democratic support, although they may get a handful
Speaker 1: of votes uh to fill the vacancy that has been
Speaker 1: on the court since Anton and Scalia died in February
Speaker 1: last year. With me here in the Bloomberg studio to
Speaker 1: talk about this is Bloomberg Congressional team leader Kevin Whitelaw.
Speaker 1: He's also my boss. Uh, Kevin, thanks for making the
Speaker 1: time to come over here. Um, can you just walk
Speaker 1: us through what has happened today and then and then
Speaker 1: what will happen with the vote tomorrow? Wells have been
Speaker 1: pretty widely telegraphed. W We're basically looking at a pretty
Speaker 1: big historic move where the where the Democrats did vote
Speaker 1: as expected to try to block the nomination, and uh,
Speaker 1: Mitch McConnell, a Republican leader, made a series of motions
Speaker 1: that resulted in Republicans voting to change the Senate rules.
Speaker 1: So this follows on a change the Democrats themselves made
Speaker 1: back in to change the rules for all the nominees
Speaker 1: except for Supreme Court nominations. UH. That's basically was to
Speaker 1: take away the ability of of h take away the
Speaker 1: need for a sixty vote threshold to to to advance
Speaker 1: before you could get a formal final vote. It's called
Speaker 1: the filibuster. That margin was taken down to fifty. It's
Speaker 1: been now taken out of fifty for all nominees, including
Speaker 1: the Supreme Court. UH. And so Senate's going to go
Speaker 1: into it's likely another sort of shutdown mode in terms
Speaker 1: of of things grinding to a halt, a lot of
Speaker 1: a lot of partisan name calling and a fair amount
Speaker 1: of fallout on that front. But it will mean that,
Speaker 1: you know, Garcage will become another sprint sprint Court justice,
Speaker 1: filling out the court to nine. Uh. And that formal
Speaker 1: vote actually to confirm him, we're expecting on Friday, And
Speaker 1: this is not a total party line vote. How many
Speaker 1: Democrats do we expect will ultimately vote for Neil Garcage. Well,
Speaker 1: there were four Democrat who voted to go ahead, and
Speaker 1: advance him. So we'll see in the end how they
Speaker 1: respond uh tomorrow. But there were several Democrats that did
Speaker 1: go ahead with the notion to have cloture Um at
Speaker 1: least one of them. We think we're we're going to
Speaker 1: advance him, but then not actually support him in the end.
Speaker 1: So we'll see the exact number tomorrow when it comes.
Speaker 1: So it's not it will not be a party line vote.
Speaker 1: There will be two or three Democrats at least we
Speaker 1: expect to vote with the majority of republic With every
Speaker 1: Republican pretty much everyone in the Senator is saying how
Speaker 1: much they regret what is happening. Now, Democrats didn't have
Speaker 1: you know, they could have pulled their punches and not
Speaker 1: made this happen. Why did they feel like they needed
Speaker 1: to do this even though the result was going to
Speaker 1: be the same. And Neil Gors which is still in
Speaker 1: the Supreme going on the Supreme Court. Well, you know,
Speaker 1: Democrats said they regret this, Republicans said they regret it.
Speaker 1: But you're right, Democrats could have taken another path. Republicans
Speaker 1: could also have taken another path. Let's be clear that
Speaker 1: both sides are are full complicit players. They knew exactly
Speaker 1: what was going to happen, and they went ahead and
Speaker 1: did it. So, um, I think for for UH and
Speaker 1: what that tells you is, frankly, both saw are playing
Speaker 1: to their basis here. The Republicans absolutely we're going to
Speaker 1: confirm the Neo Garca no matter what in the Republic
Speaker 1: and the Democrats really felt they needed to do anything
Speaker 1: they could to block it given um, particularly how President
Speaker 1: Obama's UH final nominee to the Supreme Court, Merrick Garland,
Speaker 1: was blocked for a year by Republicans. So you had
Speaker 1: this sign where both sides are playing to their base. Um.
Speaker 1: But yeah, but every side that this is a really bad,
Speaker 1: bad outcome. I don't think the politically though, it actually
Speaker 1: does make perverse logics. Some have argued, and I think
Speaker 1: I've even argued that the Democrats might have been better
Speaker 1: off saving the filibuster for the next Supreme Court nomination,
Speaker 1: which could really swing the court. What's what's your take
Speaker 1: on that? Yeah, I think this is a really tough question.
Speaker 1: I think the one of the main arguments for for
Speaker 1: the Democrats and saying that they should have allowed this
Speaker 1: nomination proceived is that this notion of needing sixty votes
Speaker 1: did still, perhaps um sort of helped constrain the choice
Speaker 1: that the president faces when when he or she is
Speaker 1: trying to make a decision about who they nominate the
Speaker 1: first place. Do you take someone who's a little more
Speaker 1: of the mains, a little main you know, someone mainstream
Speaker 1: with sort of the usual qualifications. Do you take someone
Speaker 1: out of the mainstream. Do you take someone who's considered
Speaker 1: even more extreme? So there is a risk that this
Speaker 1: sort of unbounds the president, and in the choice for
Speaker 1: the next nominee, Democrats sort of felt like, you know,
Speaker 1: if they didn't, if they didn't, you know, they were
Speaker 1: gonna change it. Whenever it was blocked, they were going
Speaker 1: to change it, So it didn't really matter. I think
Speaker 1: the problem Democrats faced with this particular move was I
Speaker 1: don't think they actually ended up convincing enough Americans that
Speaker 1: Neil Garca was such a sort of threat to the
Speaker 1: court or a bad pick or unqualified, so that it
Speaker 1: became a kind of groundswell level of fight you had
Speaker 1: over sake Clarence Thomas or you know, or Robert Bourke,
Speaker 1: where you really had a huge ground swell. A lot
Speaker 1: of out there Democrats weren't happy they painted you know,
Speaker 1: Gorcitch is being out of the mainstream. I'm not sure
Speaker 1: that really stuck in the court of public opinion. And
Speaker 1: that may be in partcast of so much else going on.
Speaker 1: We only have about thirty seconds, but very quickly. Uh,
Speaker 1: is this going to stop with the filibuster of Supreme
Speaker 1: Court nominees or is it there the possibility that the
Speaker 1: Republicans will go nuclear on the filibuster for legislation as well. Yeah,
Speaker 1: And that's the thing that would really change the way
Speaker 1: the Senate works, in the way this town works, is
Speaker 1: if they get rid of that sixty vote threshold for legislation.
Speaker 1: At this point, most Republicans, including Mitch McConnell, have said, no,
Speaker 1: there's not the support to change it. They don't want
Speaker 1: to do it. That's not going to do it. That
Speaker 1: would just make the Senate just like the House. So
Speaker 1: why have it? Um But the pressure could build, and
Speaker 1: depending on what the President wants to do over the
Speaker 1: next couple of years and how much the Senate frustrates
Speaker 1: his ability to do that, there could be a ton
Speaker 1: of pressure coming on down from the White House. Okay,
Speaker 1: thanks very much, Kevin Whitelaw, Congressional team leader here for
Speaker 1: Bloomberg News, talking about the Neil Gorcers domination and the
Speaker 1: expected confirmation tomorrow, probably tomorrow after, late tomorrow afternoon or
Speaker 1: maybe even the evening. Uh. Coming up, we're gonna talk
Speaker 1: about some acquittals on lib orary manipulation. That's a trial
Speaker 1: that went on in London. That's coming up on Bloomberg
Speaker 1: Law