Now, if there is a remedy the Senate Democrats can follow to mediate an obvious breach of ethical standards of the Senate they should follow through. I do believe this is harassment, but, what do I know.
Sixth in a series
WASHINGTON — A tortured and bitter nomination (click here) battle may have stalled Gina McCarthy’s selection as the new Environmental Protection Agency administrator, but it has firmly established David Vitter as one of the Senate’s most inquisitive members.
The Republican from Louisiana has secured his place in the annals of congressional gridlock by posing a flood of 653 questions — with demands for comprehensive, written answers — to McCarthy, a career regulator who served four Republican governors in Massachusetts and has bipartisan support outside the Capitol.
Vitter’s colleagues have posed an additional 400 or so questions, boosting the total above 1,000 and raising the Republicans’ tactic of aggressive questioning to new prominence in the state of permanent partisan warfare over Obama’s Cabinet nominees....
There is a mitigation technique for this kind of mess. It is fairly straight forward. It is a valid technique, used all the time. I know this is going to send the Republicans into a tizzy, but, who cares? The Republicans are breaching ethical standards and we need an EPA director.
It is called "Keywords." The 1000 questions can be classified into subject matter. That will more than likely reduce the 1000 to about 100. There are only so many subjects, verb, adjectives, conjunctions and adverbs that construct well written questions.
So, once the questions are consolidated there is the fact Senators will never understand the answers to the questions anyway. It is then the burden of the questioner to understand the answer. It is not the nominees burden to answer a question about any aspect of the EPA on a Kindergarten level. She is not required to give a university PhD education to every questioner.
The questions can be entered into a data base and then searched for keywords. Those keywords can then consolidate the topics and a paragraph or two without sinking to explanations so much as ANSWERS can be written and redistributed to the Senators. It will be up to them to understand it all. I am not saying to deceive anyone, but, there is no need to elaborate on questions so much as simply answer them.
Given the experience and education of the nominee she can probably knock that stuff out in a few days. Good luck. I admire the willingness of the nominee to entertain the Senators in their confusion. Awfully nice of her.
Oh, one other thing. Senator Vitter has a horrible reputation for taking advantage of women. I would not hesitate to file a sexual harassment complaint against him either.
Sixth in a series
WASHINGTON — A tortured and bitter nomination (click here) battle may have stalled Gina McCarthy’s selection as the new Environmental Protection Agency administrator, but it has firmly established David Vitter as one of the Senate’s most inquisitive members.
The Republican from Louisiana has secured his place in the annals of congressional gridlock by posing a flood of 653 questions — with demands for comprehensive, written answers — to McCarthy, a career regulator who served four Republican governors in Massachusetts and has bipartisan support outside the Capitol.
Vitter’s colleagues have posed an additional 400 or so questions, boosting the total above 1,000 and raising the Republicans’ tactic of aggressive questioning to new prominence in the state of permanent partisan warfare over Obama’s Cabinet nominees....
There is a mitigation technique for this kind of mess. It is fairly straight forward. It is a valid technique, used all the time. I know this is going to send the Republicans into a tizzy, but, who cares? The Republicans are breaching ethical standards and we need an EPA director.
It is called "Keywords." The 1000 questions can be classified into subject matter. That will more than likely reduce the 1000 to about 100. There are only so many subjects, verb, adjectives, conjunctions and adverbs that construct well written questions.
So, once the questions are consolidated there is the fact Senators will never understand the answers to the questions anyway. It is then the burden of the questioner to understand the answer. It is not the nominees burden to answer a question about any aspect of the EPA on a Kindergarten level. She is not required to give a university PhD education to every questioner.
The questions can be entered into a data base and then searched for keywords. Those keywords can then consolidate the topics and a paragraph or two without sinking to explanations so much as ANSWERS can be written and redistributed to the Senators. It will be up to them to understand it all. I am not saying to deceive anyone, but, there is no need to elaborate on questions so much as simply answer them.
Given the experience and education of the nominee she can probably knock that stuff out in a few days. Good luck. I admire the willingness of the nominee to entertain the Senators in their confusion. Awfully nice of her.
Oh, one other thing. Senator Vitter has a horrible reputation for taking advantage of women. I would not hesitate to file a sexual harassment complaint against him either.
