JD Vance's first big VP moment on the horizon with possible cabinet tiebreaker vote

[mystery-ak]

JD Vance's first big VP moment on the horizon with possible cabinet tiebreaker vote
John Ratcliffe and Pete Hegseth are both in the final stages of their confirmation process
By Emma Colton Fox News
Published January 23, 2025 1:46pm EST

JD Vance's first big moment as vice president is on the horizon as the Senate prepares confirmation votes on President Donald Trump's picks to lead the CIA and Defense Department, which could require Vance stepping in with a tiebreaking vote.

Under the Constitution, vice presidents serve as the president of the Senate and are charged with the sole power of breaking tied votes in the chamber. Vance, who previously served in the Senate before his election as vice president, could employ this power in the coming days as lawmakers make their way through Trump's cabinet picks.

Senate lawmakers swiftly and unanimously confirmed Marco Rubio as secretary of state in a 99–0 vote on Monday. Other cabinet and administration picks, however, are still making their way through committee hearings and final votes.

Senate lawmakers are set to vote on Trump's pick for CIA director, John Ratcliffe, before voting on Trump's pick to lead the Department of Defense, Pete Hegseth. Fox News learned earlier this week that lawmakers could deadlock on the confirmation vote for Hegseth, which would require Vance to step in.

Republicans hold control of the Senate at 53 seats, compared to Democrats' 45 seats and two independent seats. Fox News was told that Sens. Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., Susan Collins, R-Maine, and Lisa Murkowski, R-Alaska, could break with Trump's secretary of defense nominee and vote against his confirmation. 

Ratcliffe is scheduled for a confirmation vote Thursday, which will be followed by a procedural vote to advance Hegseth's nomination. Vance could be called to Capitol Hill to break a tied vote if a handful of Republicans deny confirming the nominees.

Ratcliffe previously served as director of national intelligence under the first Trump administration, and was confirmed by the Senate in 2020 by a 49–44 vote.

more
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/jd-vances-first-big-vp-moment-horizon-possible-cabinet-tiebreaker-vote

[mystery-ak]

Voting right now on Racliffe...easily confirmed

yes 74

no  25

[Lando Lincoln]

The Democrats never care who or why, they just want a scalp.

[verga]

Praying for this.

[libertybele]

I would like to see both Hegseth and Bondi confirmed.

[mystery-ak]

Sen. Susan Collins
@SenatorCollins
After careful consideration, I have decided to vote against Pete Hegseth’s nomination for Secretary of Defense. While I appreciate his courageous military service and his ongoing commitment to our servicemembers and their families, I am concerned that he does not have the experience and perspective necessary to succeed in the job.

Our military is under tremendous pressure right now. Active conflicts in the Middle East and Europe combined with escalating threats in the Pacific, all against a backdrop of severe financial challenges and four years of ineffective leadership by the Biden Administration, make this an especially critical time for those who lead our military. The next Secretary of Defense will be responsible for managing a massive bureaucracy that includes nearly three million employees and a budget of nearly $850 billion. In addition, our next Secretary faces long-standing procurement and supply issues that continued to worsen under the Biden Administration.

In sum, the Secretary is going to be facing a number of incredibly complex problems that are going to require highly skilled management ability. I am concerned that Mr. Hegseth does not have the management experience and background that he will need in order to tackle these difficulties. His limited managerial experience involved running two small non-profit organizations that had decidedly mixed results.

I am also concerned about multiple statements, including some in the months just before he was nominated, that Mr. Hegseth has made about women serving in the military. He and I had a candid conversation in December about his past statements and apparently evolving views. I am not convinced that his position on women serving in combat roles has changed.

Women comprise nearly 18 percent of our active-duty military. They continue to make critical and valuable contributions to our national defense. I have long advocated that women who wish to serve in and can meet the rigorous standards of combat roles should be able to do so. And numerous women have proved that they can accomplish this difficult feat.

Currently, thousands of women are serving in combat roles and many others serve in non-combat functions.  Their service is essential to the success of our military.

Mr. Hegseth also appears to lack a sufficient appreciation for some of the policies that the military is required to follow because they are codified in the laws of the United States of America. While I understand his points on the importance of up-to-date and workable rules of engagement, our prohibitions against torture come from American laws and treaties ratified by the United States, including the Geneva Conventions.

Therefore, I will vote against the nomination.
1:55 PM · Jan 23, 2025
·
46.4K
 Views
🇺🇸 The Briefing Room 🇺🇸 🇮🇱

[mystery-ak]

https://twitter.com/T_Investor_/status/1882521939358720459

[dfwgator]

Sen. Susan Collins
@SenatorCollins
After careful consideration, I have decided to vote against Pete Hegseth’s nomination for Secretary of Defense. While I appreciate his courageous military service and his ongoing commitment to our servicemembers and their families, I am concerned that he does not have the experience and perspective necessary to succeed in the job.

Our military is under tremendous pressure right now. Active conflicts in the Middle East and Europe combined with escalating threats in the Pacific, all against a backdrop of severe financial challenges and four years of ineffective leadership by the Biden Administration, make this an especially critical time for those who lead our military. The next Secretary of Defense will be responsible for managing a massive bureaucracy that includes nearly three million employees and a budget of nearly $850 billion. In addition, our next Secretary faces long-standing procurement and supply issues that continued to worsen under the Biden Administration.

In sum, the Secretary is going to be facing a number of incredibly complex problems that are going to require highly skilled management ability. I am concerned that Mr. Hegseth does not have the management experience and background that he will need in order to tackle these difficulties. His limited managerial experience involved running two small non-profit organizations that had decidedly mixed results.

I am also concerned about multiple statements, including some in the months just before he was nominated, that Mr. Hegseth has made about women serving in the military. He and I had a candid conversation in December about his past statements and apparently evolving views. I am not convinced that his position on women serving in combat roles has changed.

Women comprise nearly 18 percent of our active-duty military. They continue to make critical and valuable contributions to our national defense. I have long advocated that women who wish to serve in and can meet the rigorous standards of combat roles should be able to do so. And numerous women have proved that they can accomplish this difficult feat.

Currently, thousands of women are serving in combat roles and many others serve in non-combat functions.  Their service is essential to the success of our military.

Mr. Hegseth also appears to lack a sufficient appreciation for some of the policies that the military is required to follow because they are codified in the laws of the United States of America. While I understand his points on the importance of up-to-date and workable rules of engagement, our prohibitions against torture come from American laws and treaties ratified by the United States, including the Geneva Conventions.

Therefore, I will vote against the nomination.
1:55 PM · Jan 23, 2025
·
46.4K
 Views
🇺🇸 The Briefing Room 🇺🇸 🇮🇱

Eff that B___!