[Congressional Record Volume 168, Number 68 (Tuesday, April 26, 2022)]
[Senate]
[Pages S2142-S2143]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]



             Unanimous Consent Request--Order of Procedure

  Mr. BROWN. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that 
notwithstanding rule XXII, the cloture vote with respect to the Cook 
nomination occur at a time to be determined by the majority leader 
following consultation with the Republican leader; further, that prior 
to April 29, 2022, the

[[Page S2143]]

Senate proceed to executive session to consider the following two 
nominations: Calendar No. 807, Jerome H. Powell, and Calendar No. 809, 
Philip Nathan Jefferson; that there be 60 minutes for debate, equally 
divided in the usual form, on each nomination; that upon the use or 
yielding back of time, the Senate proceed to vote without intervening 
action or debate on the nominations in the order listed; that the 
motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table with 
no intervening action or debate; that no further motions be in order; 
that any related statements be printed in the Record; that the 
President be immediately notified of the Senate's action; and that the 
Senate then resume legislative session.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection?
  The Senator from Pennsylvania.
  Mr. TOOMEY. Madam President, reserving the right to object, I want to 
be clear about what this unanimous consent request is about and what it 
attempts to do. It is an attempt not to vote, to not have the vote on 
Lisa Cook, the nominee. I have to say it is a reminder of how short 
memories are around here.
  The irony of this situation we find ourselves in is that the vacancy 
on the Federal Reserve Board is only a vacancy because, when 
Republicans had COVID absences, our Democratic colleagues would not 
extend the courtesy of rescheduling the vote to confirm Judy Shelton. 
Instead, the vote failed, and she was not confirmed. Then, lo and 
behold, we have this vacancy that has been proposed to be filled by 
Lisa Cook.
  I should also point out how persistently we tried in good faith and 
on multiple occasions to process Fed noms throughout this entire year. 
We could have confirmed Chairman Powell in January. We could have 
processed four out of five of the Fed noms in the Banking Committee 
very quickly, including Ms. Cook, but our Democratic colleagues refused 
to allow us to process those four out of five because we did not want 
to process Sarah Raskin.
  Now, Ms. Raskin ended up having to withdraw because there was 
bipartisan opposition to the radical views that she had espoused that 
the regulatory apparatus of the Fed ought to be used to allocate 
capital throughout our economy. Fortunately, there was bipartisan 
opposition to this idea.
  Now it appears--and I guess it is the logic of my colleagues--that we 
can proceed as long as we are confirming everyone but Chairman Powell 
first. I don't understand why that has to be, but they filed cloture 
before the Easter break, on Professor Cook, and now they find 
themselves in this awkward position.
  Here is what it boils down to. It is very simple. I want to vote on 
all of the noms. Republicans are ready to vote on all of the noms. Our 
Democratic colleagues have complained about not having votes. We want 
to vote. We want to vote on Lisa Cook. We want to vote on Chairman 
Powell. We want to vote on Mr. Jefferson.
  We are ready to vote, not to cancel a vote, so I object.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Objection is heard.
  The Senator from Ohio.
  Mr. BROWN. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent to speak for 3 
minutes.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. BROWN. Madam President, I understand that the objection holds--
that the ranking member of the Senate's Banking, Housing, and Urban 
Affairs Committee is essentially saying he is not willing to vote on 
all three of these--two of them right now, the other one a bit later. I 
mean, it could be right now. Again, we have tried to move on these 
nominations.
  My friend from Pennsylvania launched a boycott of a committee that I 
have never seen or a boycott which actually, because of the 50-50 
Senate, stopped us--literally stopped us--from holding a vote. He knows 
that, and he knows they have done everything they can to stop Lisa 
Cook's nomination--everything.
  I would point out also that it is not exactly an accurate version of 
history. Judy Shelton, whom my colleague mentioned, would have gone 
down if everybody had been there. He forgets that part. It wasn't just 
one Republican Member who was sick; it was another Republican Member 
who was going to vote no, and he understood the array of people in both 
parties who were opposed to Ms. Shelton.
  In understanding that, my colleague is saying let's not vote on any 
of the three of them--on either the two of them today and then Lisa 
Cook later. I understand the rules of the Senate, and that is the way 
it will be.

                          ____________________