Thank you for coming in on saturday. I know you guys are working thanks. Today i was talking to your colleague uh, just before senator casey. I was talking to senator cornyn of texas earlier. You are working today and i i is it to get ready for the barrett nomination. Is it to counter democratic moves to either push that vote back or do something to to blunt it? What well kind of all the above actually, but i mean mainly the reason we’re here is so that democrats can continue to protest. Uh. We had a series of procedural votes yesterday, they’re trying to do everything they can to delay or block her nomination and the senate is in session this weekend. We are setting up for a vote tomorrow at one o’clock it’s. What we call a cloture vote, it’s a procedural vote as long as we have every republican here and available we’ll win that and that will set up a final vote on judge barrett’s nomination for monday evening. But under the senate rules there are 30 hours of post cloture debate. We expect the democrats to use all those hours so that they can continue to demonstrate to their supporters out there that they’re protesting this and doing everything they can to stop it and that’s. Essentially, what we’re doing today they’re going to come they’re going to come up with what we call live, unanimous consent requests on the floor. We have to have somebody there to to object to those they’ll be making speeches throughout the day and both today and tomorrow, but right now, we’re on a glide path to get to this vote sometime monday evening.

Presumably, unless they yield time back and we are going to confirm her as a justice to the supreme court – and that is a very exciting thing for the court and for this country senator um, do you know that in fact, all 53 republican senators will be there For the vote and will vote for the judge, we will have, i hope, everybody there that’s the you know. The key is making sure that uh that we have a full attendance for a big vote like this. You know we may not have all 53, but we’ll have enough to confirm her. We need 51 votes out of the 53 republicans and you know obviously uh. There are a couple of our folks who are continuing to evaluate and and look at her record but in the end, we’re fully confident that when monday rolls around we’re going to have the necessary votes to confirm her to the court and everybody who meets her. Neil including her opponents, the democrats can’t help but walk away impressed with their qualifications. There is no question about that. The democrats obviously are very dug in on this over what they feel are process issues and obviously ideology issues, but she has demonstrated that she’s not she’s, not somebody who’s going to bring an ideology to the bench she’s somebody who is going to take the the law. The constitution, the facts and in an as they are written and apply them in an impartial way and that’s exactly what we want to see in a justice on the supreme court.

You’Ll be stunned to hear that many democrats don’t believe that, but senator um i’d be curious. Is the vice president going to be around? I, i don’t even know why i say justin gayes, but i guess just in case right. I mean the vice president. Obviously, is the the president of the senate, and if there is a tie, would cast a deciding vote um? Yes, presumably he will be available if necessary. I don’t anticipate that we will need him, but we want to. We don’t want to leave anything to chance here. This is a really important vote, one of the most consequential things that the united states senate does and we expect to carry out that duty and that responsibility here in the next couple of days, it’s safe to say still that uh, just as in the judiciary committee Itself no democrats will be participating. No democrats will be voting on monday um. That would be an historic first by either party just snubbing on a nomination altogether. Um. Is that still likely the case yeah? I mean, i think, that’s that’s the case they’re under so much pressure from their leadership right now. This has become a very unfortunately. The democrats have really politicized the court by their tactics and what they’ve done not showing up at the judiciary committee where her nomination was reported out not showing up yesterday on the floor when it was called up they’re doing everything they can to protest this.

But the truth of the matter is a lot of democrats. Look at the court as an auxiliary legislature where they can try and get policy outcomes and results that they can’t get through the two political branches of our government and that’s. Not what the court is about and judge barrett represents what we believe the court should be about, and that is a constitutionalist and somebody who is going to in an impartial way apply the law and the constitution, and so clearly they are they’re sore about this they’re. Not happy about it. It’S unfortunate it’s come to this because it used to be that these nominations were about qualifications. In the last 30 years, the democrats have consistently changed the rules going back to the bork nomination, the all the the judges they tried to block when george bush was president united states and that’s kind of permanently changed the atmospherics around here when it comes to processing Judicial nominations but that can’t stop us from carrying out our constitutional responsibility of advice and consent. Here in the senate and we’re going to carry that out today tomorrow and on monday i’m sending you basically you’ve got to get back to work here on stimulus, it looks dead to me, it’s not happening. Am i right, i think that’s, a fair bet. They’Re still talking, but the idea that we could even mechanically process it and get it across the senate floor between now and the election becomes increasingly remote.

As each day passes, the house have to be called back in. They got to write the language. We’D have to follow all the procedural you know deal with the procedural hurdles that we would have to deal with in the senate, but my my view on that neil is it’s, not a question of if it’s a question of when this will get done. We know we have to do more. We just think it ought to be targeted. It ought to be fiscally responsible. It shouldn’t be this all or nothing approach that nancy pelosi is proposing, which is you you do it my way or the highway and it’s way too much money, it’s spending money on things that are unrelated to the coronavirus? We we believe we need to do more to help businesses out there and we’ve actually voted in the senate now several times on legislation that would do just that. That would provide unemployment insurance help for businesses, help for schools that are continuing to open up safely, supporting resources for vaccines and therapeutics and testing money for the post office money for farmers. I mean we’ve we’ve, put we’ve moved a bill on the floor now twice in the senate, but the democrats have blocked it. So, in the end, when the smoke clears after the election, hopefully we can sit down and people can in good faith, start to compromise. But right now my impression is that the house, democrats and speaker pelosi would much rather have the issue than they would have a solution, and we want a solution.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CQ1BxESPDME