Senate votes to end TSA mask requirements, White House promises veto



The U.S. Senate on Tuesday voted 57-40 to overturn federal mask requirements on airplanes and other forms of public transportation.

A measure introduced by Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) to use the Congressional Review Act to revoke the Biden administration's public health requirements received bipartisan support, but provoked a veto threat from President Joe Biden.

Last week, the Transportation Security Administration said that in accordance with recommendations from the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, masking requirements for public transportation would be extended through April 18. The mandate would have expired on Friday.

Critics have questioned the need for the requirements given that CDC guidance says 98% of Americans live in places where it is safe to take off masks indoors.

Eight Senate Democrats joined Republicans to repeal the masking requirements — Sens. Jon Tester (D-Mont.), Jacky Rosen (D-Nev.), Catherine Cortez Masto (D-Nev.), Michael Bennet (D-Colo.), Kyrsten Sinema (D-Ariz.), Mark Kelly (D-Ariz.), Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.), and Maggie Hassan (D-N.H.).

Sen. Mitt Romney (R-Utah) was the lone Republican vote against the measure. According to CNN reporter Ali Zaslav, an aide in Romney's office said he voted against the repeal because he believes its the responsibility of public health officials to make these kinds of decisions, not politicians.

White House issues expected veto notice for GOP vote to repeal transit mask mandate: "The determination of the timeline and circumstances under which masks should be required in these settings should be guided by science, not politics."
— Nathaniel Weixel (@Nathaniel Weixel) 1647380758

After the vote, Paul said the Senate had "sent a message to unelected government bureaucrats to stop the anti-science, nanny state requirement of travel mask mandates."

Despite this strong bipartisan showing, it remains to be seen whether House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) will take up the measure in the House of Representatives. Even if the repeal were to pass the House, the White House put Congress on notice that the president would veto it.

"The determination of the timeline and circumstances under which masks should be required in these settings should be guided by science, not politics," the White House said in a statement.

White House issues expected veto notice for GOP vote to repeal transit mask mandate: "The determination of the timeline and circumstances under which masks should be required in these settings should be guided by science, not politics."
— Nathaniel Weixel (@Nathaniel Weixel) 1647380758

The repeal vote did not have enough support to overturn a hypothetical presidential veto.

Mask requirements on airplanes are unpopular and have led to incidents where passengers refuse to wear face coverings and, at times, are ejected from flights. According to the Federal Aviation Administration, since January 2021 there have been a record 6,800 unruly passenger incidents reported, the vast majority of which involve are related to face masks.

At a news conference before the vote, Republican senators led by Sen. Roger Wicker (R-Miss.), the ranking Republican on the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation, said the Biden administration's decision to extend the mask mandate doesn't make sense given that COVID-19 restrictions almost everywhere in the country are coming down.

“People can sit shoulder to shoulder in restaurants across the land now, without a mask, they can go to shopping centers, they can go to malls — everywhere but an airport, which looks a lot like a shopping mall to me,” Wicker said, according to Roll Call.

Six GOP senators vote for Jan. 6 commission, but 54-35 vote fails to overcome filibuster



Six Republican senators broke with Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) on Friday and voted for legislation that would create a 9/11-style commission to investigate the Jan. 6 riot at the U.S. Capitol.

The final vote for the commission was 54 senators in favor and 35 against, short of the 60 votes needed to break a filibuster from the Republican minority. Sens. Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska), Rob Portman (R-Ohio), Ben Sasse (R-Neb.), Bill Cassidy (R-La.), Mitt Romney (R-Utah), and Susan Collins (R-Maine) voted for the commission with all present Democrats.

Two Democratic senators were absent. Sen. Pat Toomey (R-Pa.), who is retiring after his current term, missed the vote for a family commitment but would have voted "yes," a spokesman told NBC News.

The bill, which was negotiated by House Homeland Security Chairman Rep. Bennie Thompson (D-Miss.) and ranking member Rep. John Katko (R-N.Y.), passed in the House last week by a vote of 252-175, with 35 Republicans joining Democrats in favor.

The bipartisan agreement would have created a commission with 10 members, five appointed by each party, that had the power to issue subpoenas with the agreement of both the Democratic chair and Republican vice-chair or a majority vote of the committee's members.

Republican leadership came out in opposition to the commission, with House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) claiming it would be "duplicative" and "potentially counterproductive" given ongoing bipartisan investigations into the events of Jan. 6 and criminal investigations conducted by U.S. law enforcement. Sen. McConnell echoed McCarthy's concerns, called it a "purely political exercise," and lobbied his Republican colleagues to oppose the bill.

Democrats and the media excoriated Republicans for opposing the bill, accusing them of covering-up what happened on Jan. 6 out of fealty to Trump.

Several Republicans feared the commission could be used by Democrats to politically bludgeon the Republican Party as the 2022 midterm elections approach. Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) told supporters in a video that the purpose of the commission was to damage Republicans.

Last night I read the bill creating a January 6th commissionIt isn’t designed to produce a serious inquiryIt’s… https://t.co/LmnPudt4OK

— Marco Rubio (@marcorubio) 1621621973.0

"The Democrats control committees in the House; they control committees in the Senate. They can do investigations. Some of them already are. We're going to learn from that. Capitol Police has already done its own commission about what went wrong that day. We've already learned from that," Rubio said. "So there's plenty of attention already being paid to this — not to mention that the media, who doesn't stop talking about it, they're also looking at it. So everyone's looking at it. There's no cover-up."

"They have this thing that says in order to issue a subpoena, you need both the Republican and the Democratic side, evenly divided, to agree with it. But that's not the point for politics; you don't actually need the subpoena. All you need is a story out there saying, 'Congressman so-and-so -- they want to subpoena him or her, but they can't because the Republicans are blocking it,'" he explained.

"And then the stories are going to be, number one, it creates this impression that maybe Congressman so-and-so did something wrong -- why would they want to subpoena him? And number two, the story will be 'Republicans are covering up the investigation into Congressman so-and-so.'"

But the Republicans who voted for the commission said an independent probe was needed for the truth about what happened on Jan. 6 to come out.

Sen. Romney said Wednesday "Republicans would be seen as not wanting to let the truth come out" if they voted against the bill. "I don't believe that's what's the motivation but I think that's the perception," he added.

Sen. Murkowski lambasted her GOP colleagues who opposed the bill.

"We just can't pretend that nothing bad happened, or that people just got too excitable. Something bad happened. And it's important to lay that out," she told reporters Thursday evening.

"To be making a decision for the short-term political gain at the expense of understanding and acknowledging what was in front of us, on January 6th, I think we need to look at that critically," she said.

After the vote, Sen. Cassidy released a statement explaining why he voted "yes," saying an independent commission would have guaranteed Republicans have "equal power" over the investigation's proceedings.

"Without this commission, there will still be an investigation. But it will be a House select-committee set up by Speaker Pelosi — the nature of which will be entirely dictated by Democrats and would stretch on for years," Cassidy said.

"I am concerned about Speaker Pelosi's role regarding the lack of adequate security at the Capitol on the day of the vote certification. It's hard to believe that an investigation entirely run by Democrats would fully evaluate this concern. We can be more confident that the independent commission would thoroughly investigate this issue," he continued.

"The investigations will happen with or without Republicans," Cassidy said. "To ensure the investigations are fair, impartial, and focused on the facts, Republicans need to be involved."

Cassidy not telling reporters why he voted yes. Handing us this statement instead: “The investigations will happe… https://t.co/FLL99Or868

— Andrew Solender (@AndrewSolender) 1622216642.0

Amy Coney Barrett will most certainly be confirmed, but GOP Sen. Susan Collins will vote 'No'



Sen. Susan Colins (R-Maine) restated her opposition to Judge Amy Coney Barrett's confirmation to the Supreme Court Sunday ahead of Monday evening's scheduled final vote on the Senate floor.

Noting her vote does not reflect her opinion of Judge Barrett, Collins said that it would not be "fair nor consistent" for the Senate to confirm her to the court after refusing to consider President Barrack Obama's nominee Judge Merrick Garland four years ago.

"Prior to Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg's death, I stated that, should a vacancy on the Supreme Court arise, the Senate should follow the precedent set four years ago and not vote on a nominee prior to the presidential election," Collins said in a statement. "Since her passing, I have reiterated that in fairness to the American people — who will either be re-electing the President or selecting a new one — the decision on the nominee to fill the Supreme Court vacancy should be made by whoever is elected on November 3rd."

"Because this vote is occurring prior to the election, I will vote against the nomination of Judge Amy Coney Barrett," she added.

On Sunday, Senate Republicans voted 51-48 to advance Barrett's nomination on the Senate floor, triggering a 30-hour period for debate before the final vote will take place Monday evening. Every Republican except Sens. Susan Collins and Lisa Murkowski (Alaska) voted in favor of advancing Barrett, and all Democrats opposed.

Though Murkowski voted against advancing the nomination, she said in a speech Sunday that she will vote for Barrett's confirmation.

"I have no doubt about her intellect. I have no doubt about Judge Barrett's judicial temperament. I have no doubt about her capability to do the job," Murkowski said on the Senate floor. "I have concluded that she is the sort of person we want on the Supreme Court."

Collins is expected to be the lone Senate Republican voting against Barrett's confirmation. No Democrats have announced their intention to vote for Barrett.

After Barrett cleared the final procedural hurdle before the final confirmation vote, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) remarked that the Senate should be proud of advancing Barrett.

"A lot of what we've done over the last four years will be undone sooner or later by the next election," McConnell said. "They won't be able to do much about this for a long time to come."