Posted on 03/23/2017 9:56:26 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
Democrats may be ready to throw in the towel in opposing the nomination of Neil Gorsuch to be associate justice of the Supreme Court. According to Politico, several sources are reporting that a group of Democrat senators may be willing to allow the Gorsuch confirmation to go through on the Senate floor in exchange for a pledge from Republicans not to get rid of the filibuster. Their thinking is that if President Trump has another opportunity to name a Supreme Court justice, they want the option of blocking any nominee.
Another vacancy would be far more consequential, as it would determine the balance of power between liberals and conservatives on the court.
If Democrats move ahead with the plan – it's still in the early discussion phase – it would require buy-in from some Republicans, but not necessarily Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) or his top deputies. At least three rank-and-file GOP members would have to pledge not to vote to unilaterally change the Senate rules through a majority-only vote later in Trump's term – the so-called nuclear option.
Cobbling together a group of senators from opposing parties to take such a stand would be difficult, given the long-running partisan war over confirming judges and pressure from the left to deny Gorsuch confirmation. But some Democrats are worried enough about the Senate losing its unique minority rights that they've begun kicking the tires on the potential for a new bipartisan "gang."
The current talks are limited to about a half-dozen Democratic lawmakers. They haven't made an offer to Republicans yet, and Democratic leaders wouldn't support one.
Democrats familiar with the effort requested anonymity to discuss a sensitive matter that divides the caucus.
(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com ...
He also told DiFi that Heller was "the law of the land".
Are you OK with that one?
“My offer is this: nothing. Not even the fee for the gaming license, which I would appreciate if you put up personally.”
Its what politicians do best... to McConnell!
Here's an oldie post of mine from 2009 on Harry Reid's history of reneging on promises:
...McConnell got Reid to agree to hold a high-profile debt-limit vote next month -- just before the president's State of the Union address...Specter suggests Reid reneged on word.
Newly-turned Democrat Arlen Specter today hinted that that Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid reneged on his word to allow Specter to keep his seniority on committees on which he sits. "Sen. Reid assured me that I would keep my committee assignments, and that I would have the same seniority as if I had been elected as a Democrat in 1980," Specter said in a written statement today.Reid Bows to Far Left as Rs Rank Judges Issue #1.
And they undoubtedly have the Rasmussen survey results in the back of their minds as they consider their reaction to Majority Leader Reid’s broken promise to confirm three appeals court nominees before the Memorial Day recess, as well as Reid’s sure-to-be-broken earlier promises to meet the historical average (17) for appeals court confirmations in a president’s final two years. With just a couple of months left in the confirmation window, Reid is less than halfway to meeting that average.[snip]
“A good GOP Senate source reports today that Minority Leader Mitch McConnell addressed the entire Republican Conference … about the judge-fight issue. McConnell is said to have been very insistent that he would not let Majority Leader Reid's broken promise go unpunished … He would not tell the Conference exactly what action he was planning, but he did say it would be very firm, and that all concerned would know it when we see it.” – Quin Hillyer (5/21/08)
[snip]
While Sen. Lott overcame numerous obstacles to get Paez and Berzon confirmed, Sen. Reid has looked for excuses to renege on his pledge.
[snip]
GOP senators are understandably angry that Sen. Reid broke the golden rule of senatorial honor by reneging on his commitment.
[snip]
Democrats Target Coburn’s Holds
To ease passage of the public lands measure, Reid promised Coburn the chance to offer a limited number of amendments.Reid: No Vote On Lifting Drug Import Ban Before Health-Care BillBut after the majority leader objected to a Coburn proposal that would have eased restrictions on firearms in national parks, the package stalled for months, prompting Coburn to charge that Reid reneged on their agreement.
Coburn eventually got to offer four amendments — all of which were defeated — but not the guns measure.
Republicans accused U.S. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., of reneging Tuesday on a pledge to allow a Senate vote on a measure lifting an import ban on pharmaceutical drugs before lawmakers take up health-care legislation.The development, supported by major drug makers, comes as the Senate is moving to craft the politically delicate compromises needed for the broader health care overhaul bill.
In a letter to a bipartisan group of senators that have been pushing for the import ban to be scrapped, Reid said there wouldn't be time in the busy legislative calendar for full consideration of legislation lifting the long-standing prohibition now.
"He did commit to us and obviously that commitment is not going to be kept," Senator John McCain, R-Ariz., said Tuesday evening.
Recently...
AFL-CIO Boss to Harry Reid: Go Nuclear
Sen. Jeff Merkley (D., Ore.) accused Republicans of trying to “disable the administration” by blocking the appointments, though he stopped short of saying “campaign donations are directly attributable” for GOP opposition. Merkley received $1.2 million from labor groups since 2010, including more than $275,000 for his 2014 campaign.Merkley defended President Obama’s recess appointments while the Senate was in session because “functionally we were out of session.” He also accused McConnell of violating a pair of “gentleman’s agreements” to confirm President Obama’s nominees without “obstruction” from the minority.
Obama and Reid reneged on a labor truce of their own when the Democrats re-nominated Block and Griffin to the board, according to a top Republican aide.
-PJ
I don’t think this would be nearly as bad a deal as some are making it out to be.
If we get Gorsuch we would have 4 conservatives, 4 libs and one wobbler. The oldest justices are either lib or the wobbler.
The odds are with us that we would be in a better position after the next vacancy, even if the Dems filibustered a conservative appointment. The worst we can do is 4-4 and just leave the vacancy open until after the mid-terms. And with the mid-terms we can probably replace a few D senators. Not only might this make a filibuster impossible, we only need one pickup to go nuclear if there is a vacancy even if the Dems get 3 to agree on non-nuke.
Or, we could hold the Dems feet to the fire and get agreement on a list of acceptable nominees, maybe even a few from DJT’s list. They are not in a position to demand flaming liberals. This would bind the Dems, but not DJT. If he thought the situation was right, he could nominate anyone he chose, but if
he nominated anyone on the “pre-approved” list he would be guaranteed an appointment.
The alternative is the nuclear option now. Anyone want to bet all the libs on the court last 8 years?
>
The Republicans have been called “The Stupid Party” - and rightly so, because they never miss an opportunity to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory.
NO DEAL YOU MORONS!!! We finally have the Dems by the short hairs, DON’T LET GO! Make them fillibuster to show who they are (especially since many/most of them voted for Gorsuch for Circuit Court judge. Then present your use of the (Harry Reid) nuclear option as being necessary to defeat the Party of Obstruction.
>
Sorry, but the only stupid part of the Party is the electorate.
Those that continue to vote for the same time and time again, while expecting ‘em, *THIS* time, to: 1) NOT stab ‘em in the back 2) fight the ‘oppostion’ 3) stand up for their position(s)\promises\Constitution 4) grow a back-bone.
Yet, right out of the gate, they fall back to the hemming-n-hawing re: O’Care, budget ‘cuts’ (of YUGE, ‘draconian’ proportions....of 2%), The Wall vs. law vs. illegal aliens, etc.
As is with abortion, “Gay” marriage is not law but a judicial fiat often overturning real law passed by legislative bodies or voted on by the people! So-called “case law” is a scam and a YUGE threat to our liberty. NO legislative body has ever passed it... as “case law” was adjudicated not legislated. “Case law” is not only un-Constitutional, its ANTI-Constitutional. ALL case law (that pretends to be law) should be reviewed by Congress and voted on. If it does not pass Congress it should no longer BE law. Thomas Jefferson warned that an un-fettered judiciary could become “Black Robed Deities”! Score one for our 3rd president!
He’s a fool if he does. Trump should place a call to Mitch and let him know this is a bad deal and ties his hands the rest of the Trump administration on judges at all levels, bad bad deal!
You don’t have them by the short hairs. You have a razor thin majority.
You really have to get educated about 2009. They Had 60 Seats. We are nowhere near that. We’ll be nowhere near that in 2018 either.
We don’t have a mandate for extremism. Trump is a populist, not a conservative, and he didn’t win most of the votes.
Obamacare was an overreach and cost them those monumental majorities that they had (and that we do NOT have). Don’t repeat the overreach mistake.
If you want to provide advice to McConnell about the situation, here’s his email contact form. I doubt he, or anyone else reads these submittals, but it made me feel better to send him one anyway! :-)
https://www.mcconnell.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/contact?p=ContactForm
Well I certainly hope the head of the ‘Wiley Coyote’ wing of the R Party, commonly known as RINOs - has his fingers crossed when he agrees to the ‘deal’.
OR, like all the RINOs that ‘forced’ D Trump to sign the ‘Pledge’ - along with them - THEY had absolutely no problem NOT only NOT supporting D Trump but openly oppose him by forming a Never-Trump movement.
The RINOs have no problem with kissing Liberal butts and not breaking promises but will ‘stab fellow R’s in the back’ at any given opportunity.
Much as I may ‘hate’ the D party, them are at least loyal to themselves.....
Terrible deal, but the homosexual McConnell will take it.
The question that needs to be asked of Gorsuch is: have you a principle in your judicial philosophy you will articulate by which you could overturn precedents which are the law of the land or settled law?
Push the button. Deploy the nuke.
Screw the Dems.
No deal, no pledge.
RE: but the homosexual McConnell will take it.
Do you know something that most of us don’t?
They’re in essence telling you that the next Trump SCOTT’S nominee WILL be filibustered. So what difference does it make if we nuke them now? It is they who have declared war.
[A deal isn’t necessary to confirm Gorsuch. Tell the Rats to pound sand.]
Thank you.
Yup. This is simply to get it back to a 4-4 vote with Kennedy being the most powerful man in the free world. His is the vote they play for. But, if another conservative were to replace one of the liberals, say old lady Ginsberg, then it would be 5-3, with Kennedy’s vote no longer the requirement, unless of course that idiot Roberts goes off the rails again, like Obammycare, where he lost his stinking mind, and went dimocrat. That old fool needs to be replaced with a solid conservative.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.