One silver lining is that we are no longer taking democracy for granted. From the chaos may come a new Democracy tooled to deal with 21st Century issues.
I am happy that so many Senators went on record in opposition. It was considered to be a symbolic vote. The House would have had to pass it too, and instead approved a rule to block a vote on the resolution Even if the resolution had passed the Senate and House, trump would need to sign it before going into effect. He already said he would veto the bill.
Senator Sheldon Whitehouse was traveling, returning from a trip to South Korea. Please see my other post. As far as I can see, the timing and the result of this vote was a mistake by Schumer.
Suggestion: Call/write/email/carrier pigeon your Democratic senator (if you have one) Point out that everyone has strong and weak points, and that some people do not have the capability to effectively oppose a crazy and out of control foe. Quote Clausewitz and/or Sun Tzu on the art of war. Schumer needs to step down in favor of a senator who has the skill set needed in the present situation.
But we don't know that he was given a choice. It might have been in the past, or just under Democrats but is it a rule? I really don't like us dumping on Democrats unless we know. We got a lot done with just the bare minimum of Democrats when he was Majority leader, don't recall any Republicans dumping on the Minority leader during those years. That may be where Republicans have us beat...right or wrong, in the Senate they all stuck together. We should take a page out of that book, especially if it was not a decision Schumer was in on.
Procedures are in Senate rules. Rule XIV pertains to Joint Resolutions like S.J.Res. 49. The Senate majority leader is responsible for controlling the daily agenda by scheduling debates and votes, usually in consultation with the Committee Chairs. As I understand it, that happens the day before it is on the agenda. https://www.rules.senate.gov/rules-of-the-senate
...and in consultation with the Minority Leader. From the live Senate broadcasts that I have watched, there have been endless references to "by agreement between the Majority and Minority Leader".
"One way the Senate can take up a bill is by agreeing to a motion to proceed to it. Once a Senator – typically the majority leader – makes such a motion that the Senate proceed to a certain bill, the Senate can then normally debate the motion to proceed. If it eventually agrees to the motion by a majority vote, the Senate can then begin consideration of the bill. Alternatively, the majority leader can ask unanimous consent that the Senate take up a certain bill. If no one objects to such a request when it is made, then the Senate can immediately begin consideration of the bill in question. (When the leader refrains from making such a request because he has been informed that a Senator would object, it is often said that a Senator has placed a hold on the bill.)" https://www.congress.gov/legislative-process/calendars-and-scheduling
The House had already passed a resolution to block the bill, and trump said he would refuse to sign the legislation if it had passed. Politico reported that this was a symbolic vote. The Hill reported that "The measure is nonbinding and would have been dead on arrival in the House." https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/5275868-trump-tariffs-senate-vote/
Yes, I know, this is all true. But it was a symbolic vote that mattered – and one Senate Democrats could and should have won. The symbolic victory was within reach – that was my point.
As we plan for the upcoming fourth of July and weigh its symbolic importance, I’m reminded that among our great reimaginings of the Declaration, the most consequential and perhaps the most pertinent to our perilous time is found in Lincoln’s Gettysburg Address. In his masterpiece of reasoning and poetry, Lincoln began the address with a direct reference to the Declaration:
“Four score and seven years ago our fathers brought forth on this continent, a new nation, conceived in liberty, and dedicated to the proposition that all men are created equal.
“Now we are engaged in a great civil war, testing whether that nation, or any nation so conceived and so dedicated, can long endure.”
In 1863, it was very much a question of whether the nation conceived in liberty could long endure. Lincoln rightly contemplated the sacrifice that men had made on the battlefield of Gettysburg, but he argued that the defense of liberty could not only be their work and their sacrifice. “It is for us the living, rather, to be dedicated here to the unfinished work which they who fought here have thus far so nobly advanced.”
In a larger sense, the promises of the Declaration are always already our unfinished work. Lincoln understood that, with the world-altering destructiveness and division of the war, the endurance of the Republic would require “a new birth of freedom.” It would not be enough to win the war. If a government of the people, by the people, and for the people were not to perish from the earth, then we, the living, would have the great task of reconceiving our original liberties and rededicating ourselves to their flourishing.
And so, as we approach the fourth of July, I remember Lincoln’s reimagining of the Declaration and contemplate the necessity of our own.
The Senators that did not vote to rein his foolish Tariffs should all be voted out of office! They are totally just as accountable for this fiasco as Trump! Probably more so, because at least they could have slowed down his Tariff madness! Get them out!
In about three weeks, when the shelves at Wal-Mart are bare, the DNC should start running ads with those senators voting for tariffs in a split screen with empty shelves and higher prices. They're making it so easy!
Ha! Trump has been breaking our laws for his entire adult life! He’s a career criminal! And 77 million Americans gave him the keys to our future well being! He is giving Americans🖕
Electorate: We're super upset about high prices!!! We want lower prices NOW!!!
Trump talks constantly about imposing tariffs for a year. Biden, and then Harris, along with almost all economists, CEO's, and folks from both sides, constantly talk about how tariffs will increase prices.
Majority of the electorate votes Trump into office, despite the above, because they think he'll lower prices.
Polls consistently show that 70% of people think that tariffs will raise prices
Electorate: We're super upset about tariffs increasing prices!!!
Figuring out how to break through to the majority of this electorate is the key challenge of politics.
It’s a deep dive into what we’ve been working on at the DNC. As partners in this work, I’d love to hear your thoughts or answer any questions you might have. Feel free to reach out at leadershipcircle@dnc.org.
Hi Peri! First, it’s wonderful to see all the good work the DNC is now doing! There has been a sea change in the last few months – a stellar improvement!
But I am wondering whether the DNC has sorted out the problem of David Hogg running an organization to challenge Democratic incumbents?
I respect and applaud his effort to replace weak incumbents with younger politicians who are ready to fight. After all, this is what the moment calls for! But I have a hard time seeing that Hogg can do this while also serving as DNC Vice Chair.
Peri: Do you see this as a conflict of interest? Will Hogg have to make a choice?
Hi! Great questions! Jane Kleeb talked about this in her live interview with Simon today.
I think Chair Martin said it best in his opinion piece in Time Magazine on the subject: "Our role is to serve as stewards of a fair, open, and trusted process—not to tilt the scales. In the coming days, I’ll introduce a new slate of structural reforms that codify these principles of neutrality and fairness into our official party rules, requiring all party officers—myself included—to remain neutral in all Democratic
primaries. A clear neutrality policy protects against the misuse or abuse of power by those in official positions
Thank you for your crystal-clear answers! And the references. Very much appreciated. (I have not yet had a chance to watch Simon’s interview with Jane Kleeb.)
Thanks for the link. An impressive start by Ken Martin and the team! But I saw no mention of an effort to register Democratic voters. Is that under discussion?
Hi Sarah! Yes absolutely! Jane Kleeb actually talked about our work on voter registration in the live interview she did with Simon today -- I can cover it in more depth in my next newsletter, but in short, our new strategy is to execute partisan voter registration in-house at the DNC and the state parties. For a while, we have left voter registration in the hands of c3 and c4 organizations, which by law cannot do partisan voter registration. The GOP was very successful at partisan voter registration in the lead up to the 2024 election, and it paid off. We're not ceding any more ground.
Key Point: “This isn’t a personal stand, it’s a principled stand for something greater than any one of us: the integrity of our party’s democratic process. Our role is to serve as stewards of a fair, open, and trusted process—not to tilt the scales. In the coming days, I’ll introduce a new slate of structural reforms that codify these principles of neutrality and fairness into our official party rules, requiring all party officers—myself included—to remain neutral in all Democratic primaries. A clear neutrality policy protects against the misuse or abuse of power by those in official positions.”
Just wanted to echo your idea from last night that there is a great opportunity to bring a spotlight on the recent decimation of public health and scientific research. These actions will hurt in the near-term and for generations to come. It is so foolish and heart-breaking. Humanity will suffer.
DEMOCRATS SHOULD (AND COULD!) HAVE WON THE TARIFF VOTE
But the tariff vote did NOT end 49–49. The Majority Leader followed this up with a vote to TABLE the motion; that vote too was 49–49, with the difference that VP Vance then cast a tie-breaking vote. As I understand it, this prevent the legislation from being reconsidered by the Senate.
What I don’t understand is why Minority Leader Schumer failed to ensure a delay of the vote! After all, he knew that Senator Sheldon Whitehouse was traveling and would not return from South Korea in time. (McConnell also missed the vote, and he too, being opposed to Trump’s tariffs, might well have voted for the Wyden bill.)
NOTE: As far as I can see, Senate Democrats had an opportunity to rescind the declaration of "national emergency" that Trump has used as an excuse for his wildly-damaging tariffs. Now, due to a tactical error by Schumer, it won’t happen.
One silver lining is that we are no longer taking democracy for granted. From the chaos may come a new Democracy tooled to deal with 21st Century issues.
The thing is his and Elon’s breaking will cost Americans more precious tax dollars and make our deficit much more difficult to overcome!
(a) Where was Sheldon Whitehouse last night?
(b) I am not a Whitehouse constituent. Shouldn't his constituents ask him where he was? the resolution would have passed if he wasn't AWOL
You beat me to it.
especially surprising given what a stalwart he has been to date. I am really disappointed.
I am happy that so many Senators went on record in opposition. It was considered to be a symbolic vote. The House would have had to pass it too, and instead approved a rule to block a vote on the resolution Even if the resolution had passed the Senate and House, trump would need to sign it before going into effect. He already said he would veto the bill.
https://www.politico.com/live-updates/2025/04/30/congress/senate-rebukes-trumps-global-tariffs-00319829
Senator Sheldon Whitehouse was traveling, returning from a trip to South Korea. Please see my other post. As far as I can see, the timing and the result of this vote was a mistake by Schumer.
Schumer has really not been up to the task lately, has he? We need a better general directing the defense of our country
Suggestion: Call/write/email/carrier pigeon your Democratic senator (if you have one) Point out that everyone has strong and weak points, and that some people do not have the capability to effectively oppose a crazy and out of control foe. Quote Clausewitz and/or Sun Tzu on the art of war. Schumer needs to step down in favor of a senator who has the skill set needed in the present situation.
One more reason Schumer must go!
Did the Democrats actually get to choose the timing of this considering they are in the minority?
I don’t know the specifics, but I think the timing of votes is generally by agreement between the Majority and Minority Leaders.
But we don't know that he was given a choice. It might have been in the past, or just under Democrats but is it a rule? I really don't like us dumping on Democrats unless we know. We got a lot done with just the bare minimum of Democrats when he was Majority leader, don't recall any Republicans dumping on the Minority leader during those years. That may be where Republicans have us beat...right or wrong, in the Senate they all stuck together. We should take a page out of that book, especially if it was not a decision Schumer was in on.
Procedures are in Senate rules. Rule XIV pertains to Joint Resolutions like S.J.Res. 49. The Senate majority leader is responsible for controlling the daily agenda by scheduling debates and votes, usually in consultation with the Committee Chairs. As I understand it, that happens the day before it is on the agenda. https://www.rules.senate.gov/rules-of-the-senate
...and in consultation with the Minority Leader. From the live Senate broadcasts that I have watched, there have been endless references to "by agreement between the Majority and Minority Leader".
I see. "The conferences (also referred to as caucuses) and their leaders play an important role in the daily functions of the Senate, including setting legislative agendas, organizing committees, and determining how action proceeds on the Senate floor." https://www.senate.gov/about/parties-leadership.htm#:~:text=The%20conferences%20(also%20referred%20to,proceeds%20on%20the%20Senate%20floor.
I found this too.
https://www.congress.gov/crs-product/96-548#:~:text=The%20Senate%20gives%20its%20majority,to%20the%20floor%20for%20action and
https://www.congress.gov/crs-product/98-429
More on process...
"One way the Senate can take up a bill is by agreeing to a motion to proceed to it. Once a Senator – typically the majority leader – makes such a motion that the Senate proceed to a certain bill, the Senate can then normally debate the motion to proceed. If it eventually agrees to the motion by a majority vote, the Senate can then begin consideration of the bill. Alternatively, the majority leader can ask unanimous consent that the Senate take up a certain bill. If no one objects to such a request when it is made, then the Senate can immediately begin consideration of the bill in question. (When the leader refrains from making such a request because he has been informed that a Senator would object, it is often said that a Senator has placed a hold on the bill.)" https://www.congress.gov/legislative-process/calendars-and-scheduling
The House had already passed a resolution to block the bill, and trump said he would refuse to sign the legislation if it had passed. Politico reported that this was a symbolic vote. The Hill reported that "The measure is nonbinding and would have been dead on arrival in the House." https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/5275868-trump-tariffs-senate-vote/
Yes, I know, this is all true. But it was a symbolic vote that mattered – and one Senate Democrats could and should have won. The symbolic victory was within reach – that was my point.
Well, you always make a good point! I'm just trying to find the maximum amount of Hopium in it to cope with all this.
Me too!
He was in North Korea and Schumer should have postponed the vote so Senator Whitehouse could have voted.
He couldn't. The Majority leader has that privilege as to timing.
Thank you. I didn’t know that. 🌷
As we plan for the upcoming fourth of July and weigh its symbolic importance, I’m reminded that among our great reimaginings of the Declaration, the most consequential and perhaps the most pertinent to our perilous time is found in Lincoln’s Gettysburg Address. In his masterpiece of reasoning and poetry, Lincoln began the address with a direct reference to the Declaration:
“Four score and seven years ago our fathers brought forth on this continent, a new nation, conceived in liberty, and dedicated to the proposition that all men are created equal.
“Now we are engaged in a great civil war, testing whether that nation, or any nation so conceived and so dedicated, can long endure.”
In 1863, it was very much a question of whether the nation conceived in liberty could long endure. Lincoln rightly contemplated the sacrifice that men had made on the battlefield of Gettysburg, but he argued that the defense of liberty could not only be their work and their sacrifice. “It is for us the living, rather, to be dedicated here to the unfinished work which they who fought here have thus far so nobly advanced.”
In a larger sense, the promises of the Declaration are always already our unfinished work. Lincoln understood that, with the world-altering destructiveness and division of the war, the endurance of the Republic would require “a new birth of freedom.” It would not be enough to win the war. If a government of the people, by the people, and for the people were not to perish from the earth, then we, the living, would have the great task of reconceiving our original liberties and rededicating ourselves to their flourishing.
And so, as we approach the fourth of July, I remember Lincoln’s reimagining of the Declaration and contemplate the necessity of our own.
The Senators that did not vote to rein his foolish Tariffs should all be voted out of office! They are totally just as accountable for this fiasco as Trump! Probably more so, because at least they could have slowed down his Tariff madness! Get them out!
In about three weeks, when the shelves at Wal-Mart are bare, the DNC should start running ads with those senators voting for tariffs in a split screen with empty shelves and higher prices. They're making it so easy!
Called my rep this morning, and emailed, as part of the citizens impeachment project. Now on my way to the law Day protests
Ha! Trump has been breaking our laws for his entire adult life! He’s a career criminal! And 77 million Americans gave him the keys to our future well being! He is giving Americans🖕
This electorate... sheesh.
Electorate: We're super upset about high prices!!! We want lower prices NOW!!!
Trump talks constantly about imposing tariffs for a year. Biden, and then Harris, along with almost all economists, CEO's, and folks from both sides, constantly talk about how tariffs will increase prices.
Majority of the electorate votes Trump into office, despite the above, because they think he'll lower prices.
Polls consistently show that 70% of people think that tariffs will raise prices
Electorate: We're super upset about tariffs increasing prices!!!
Figuring out how to break through to the majority of this electorate is the key challenge of politics.
Learning the hard way.
Hi everyone! This is Peri from the DNC Mobilization Team —
I’m excited to share my April Recap Newsletter, highlighting the incredible progress our grassroots supporters—like you—made possible. You can read it here: https://democrats.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/05/April-Recap-LC-Newsletter-3-compressed.pdf
It’s a deep dive into what we’ve been working on at the DNC. As partners in this work, I’d love to hear your thoughts or answer any questions you might have. Feel free to reach out at leadershipcircle@dnc.org.
Thank you Peri! And come see Jane Kleeb today at 2pm - we will be talking about all this great work today!
Will do!
Hi Peri! First, it’s wonderful to see all the good work the DNC is now doing! There has been a sea change in the last few months – a stellar improvement!
But I am wondering whether the DNC has sorted out the problem of David Hogg running an organization to challenge Democratic incumbents?
I respect and applaud his effort to replace weak incumbents with younger politicians who are ready to fight. After all, this is what the moment calls for! But I have a hard time seeing that Hogg can do this while also serving as DNC Vice Chair.
Peri: Do you see this as a conflict of interest? Will Hogg have to make a choice?
Hi! Great questions! Jane Kleeb talked about this in her live interview with Simon today.
I think Chair Martin said it best in his opinion piece in Time Magazine on the subject: "Our role is to serve as stewards of a fair, open, and trusted process—not to tilt the scales. In the coming days, I’ll introduce a new slate of structural reforms that codify these principles of neutrality and fairness into our official party rules, requiring all party officers—myself included—to remain neutral in all Democratic
primaries. A clear neutrality policy protects against the misuse or abuse of power by those in official positions
https://time.com/7280045/voters-should-pick-their-candidates-not-party-bosses/
Thank you for your crystal-clear answers! And the references. Very much appreciated. (I have not yet had a chance to watch Simon’s interview with Jane Kleeb.)
Thanks for the link. An impressive start by Ken Martin and the team! But I saw no mention of an effort to register Democratic voters. Is that under discussion?
Hi Sarah! Yes absolutely! Jane Kleeb actually talked about our work on voter registration in the live interview she did with Simon today -- I can cover it in more depth in my next newsletter, but in short, our new strategy is to execute partisan voter registration in-house at the DNC and the state parties. For a while, we have left voter registration in the hands of c3 and c4 organizations, which by law cannot do partisan voter registration. The GOP was very successful at partisan voter registration in the lead up to the 2024 election, and it paid off. We're not ceding any more ground.
Peri - I LOVE this!!
READ: Voters Should Pick their Candidates, Not Party Bosses | TIME Op-Ed by DNC Chair Ken Martin https://time.com/7280045/voters-should-pick-their-candidates-not-party-bosses/
Key Point: “This isn’t a personal stand, it’s a principled stand for something greater than any one of us: the integrity of our party’s democratic process. Our role is to serve as stewards of a fair, open, and trusted process—not to tilt the scales. In the coming days, I’ll introduce a new slate of structural reforms that codify these principles of neutrality and fairness into our official party rules, requiring all party officers—myself included—to remain neutral in all Democratic primaries. A clear neutrality policy protects against the misuse or abuse of power by those in official positions.”
The 49 Senators defending Trump’s Tariffs are more delusional than he! Vote their A** out! They are worthless to the American people!
We should call them Republican tariffs, not Trump tariffs.
President Biden left these clown with a booming economy and in less than 100 days he’s destroyed it!
Just wanted to echo your idea from last night that there is a great opportunity to bring a spotlight on the recent decimation of public health and scientific research. These actions will hurt in the near-term and for generations to come. It is so foolish and heart-breaking. Humanity will suffer.
It is beginning:
https://www.medpagetoday.com/special-reports/features/115351
https://www.nbcnews.com/data-graphics/track-measles-outbreak-cases-us-map-rcna198932
This is Trump’s economy, no matter how he try’s to make President Biden his scapegoat! He’s a failure!
DEMOCRATS SHOULD (AND COULD!) HAVE WON THE TARIFF VOTE
But the tariff vote did NOT end 49–49. The Majority Leader followed this up with a vote to TABLE the motion; that vote too was 49–49, with the difference that VP Vance then cast a tie-breaking vote. As I understand it, this prevent the legislation from being reconsidered by the Senate.
What I don’t understand is why Minority Leader Schumer failed to ensure a delay of the vote! After all, he knew that Senator Sheldon Whitehouse was traveling and would not return from South Korea in time. (McConnell also missed the vote, and he too, being opposed to Trump’s tariffs, might well have voted for the Wyden bill.)
NOTE: As far as I can see, Senate Democrats had an opportunity to rescind the declaration of "national emergency" that Trump has used as an excuse for his wildly-damaging tariffs. Now, due to a tactical error by Schumer, it won’t happen.
Please tell me if I am wrong.
AMEN! I just posted a similar comment. Right now I see it as a performative act that doesn’t fly with me.
If Schumer fumbled again, then it's time to consider a replacement as leader.
It would not have passed in the House, and Orange would have vetoed if it did.
True, but passing this bill in the Senate would have mattered to our Democratic narrative.
He’s abandoned the American people and destroyed our beautiful country and economy!
We all have to continue to be out here fighting against this foolish dumbA** clown masquerading as president!
If he did his job as president, for the American people instead of himself his family, and his friends, he would be liked!