Posted on 11/10/2003 6:04:20 AM PST by Tumbleweed_Connection
After months of promising conservatives that they will confront the Democrats who are blocking President George W. Bush's judicial nominations, Senate Republicans will force a "real" filibuster to take place on the floor of the United States Senate beginning Wednesday evening. All 51 members of the Republican caucus in the U.S. Senate will be present for the "Justice For Judges Marathon" starting at 6:00 p.m. on Wednesday and ending at midnight Friday morning. The 30-hour debate is expected to demonstrate GOP solidarity behind Bush's judicial nominees. Several of the president's nominees have been prevented from having an up or down vote because of the threat of a filibuster by the Democrats. During the debate, no other Senate business will take place, including several spending bills, an energy bill, and a Medicare reform package. As expected, Senate Democrats say they are concerned that the U.S. Senate will be unable to recess by November 21 as planned. Nevertheless, Senate Republicans believe the time will be well worth it to give the judicial nominees an opportunity to be considered. "The objective is to get an up or a down vote," remarked Sen. Rick Santorum (R-PA) to Fox News. "These nominees deserve their day in court." Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-UT), chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, says this forced filibuster will showcase the obstructionist tactics used by Senate Democrats over the past nine months with Bush's judicial nominations. "We want to let the American people know how pitiful this process has become," Hatch told Fox News. Miguel Estrada, William Pryor, Charles Pickering, and Priscilla Owen have all been nominated by Bush and have been the victims of Democrat filibuster threats. Other federal judicial nominees expected to be filibustered in the next few weeks include Claude Allen, Carolyn Kuhl, Brett Kavanaugh, and Janice Rogers Brown. John Nowacki, head of a group called Judicial Selection Monitoring Project, says the filibusters conducted by Senate Democrats have less to do with the candidate's inability to be a good judge as it does their ideology. "I think [the filibuster] demonstrates that no matter how much experience someone has, no matter how much evidence there is of someone's judicial temperament ... no matter what, there's still going to be this opposition [by Senate Democrats]," Nowacki told Agape Press. A so-called real filibuster allows any member of the U.S. Senate to stand before their fellow lawmakers and speak indefinitely to prevent a vote on the measure before them. Technically, Senate Democrats have not done this yet, but the threat of a filibuster has worked just the same. However, Senate Republicans will force those who have prevented a vote on these judicial nominees to conduct a filibuster beginning Wednesday evening. It is possible that no Democrats will show up for the special session. If that happens, then the 51 Republican Senators could offer a unanimous consent motion to confirm the judicial nominees. Senate Republicans say they are prepared for the challenge before them. In fact, they have already worked out sleeping arrangements as well as stocking up on food and drinks for consumption during the session. Senate Minority Leader Tom Daschle (D-SD) states the Democrats are also prepared for the upcoming "carnival" debate on judicial nominees. "We are going to set up our action room just off the Senate floor as we have done on other good debates such as this," Daschle told Fox News. "We'll have a presence on the floor for the full 30 hours." Daschle says this forced debate on judicial nomination is a "misuse of time." However, Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist (R-TN) says the filibuster threats have been the primary waste of time in the U.S. Senate. "It can't be tolerated. It won't be tolerated," Frist told the Seattle Times. "The goal is to break these partisan filibusters." No federal judicial nominee by the past 42 presidents has been filibustered in the history of the U.S. Senate dating back to 1784. Real filibusters in the U.S. Senate are extremely rare. The last one occurred in 1992 when former Sen. Alfonse D'Amato (R-NY) conducted one for over 14 hours in an effort to protect a major business in his state from being adversely effected by a proposed bill. However, the longest and most famous filibuster in U.S. history was in 1957 when the late Sen. Strom Thurmond (R-SC) spoke for more than 24 hours straight in opposition to a civil rights bill. Despite the media attention on this event in the U.S. Senate, nobody expects anything to immediately happen as a result of it. Democrats are expected to vote for cloture on the judicial nominees on Friday and, thus, block a vote on the judicial nominees presented. Republicans still need 60 votes in the U.S. Senate to end the debate. Family Research Council President Tony Perkins, who does not agree with the all-night strategy as a means for ending the judicial obstruction, says he likes the fact that the event may put additional pressure on Senate Democrats who have prevented a vote on the judicial nominations. "As of October 28th there have been 277 newspaper editorials in 38 states against the Democrats and only 46 editorials in 21 different newspapers in favor of their extremist tactics against judges appointed by George W. Bush," Perkins said in a press release. "This 36 hour demonstration will only add more heat to the media fire against the Democrat extremist Senators who are blocking these judges." Santorum said he and his fellow Senate Republicans have heard from many conservatives who think they have not been "fighting hard enough." Nevertheless, he says strides are being made, but "there's probably more we could do." He said the Democrats may appear to be winning the latest battles, but "long term, they're going to lose several wars." Santorum says the American people should take notice of this issue with the judicial nominees in the U.S. Senate if they see that nothing else is happening. "I don't believe the public pays attention until we stop doing other things and just do this -- and other things don't get done because of this," he told The Washington Post. Furthermore, Republicans hope the added exposure of the judicial obstruction by Senate Democrats will motivate Republican voters to get active and participate in the 2004 elections to defeat the Democrats who are blocking the judicial nominees and elect more Republicans to the U.S. Senate. Republicans assert that if they can pick up even a few more seats in the U.S. Senate in 2004, then they will be able to defeat Democrat filibuster threats. The marathon debate is expected to be televised in its entirety live on C-SPAN 2. Hourly press conferences will be conducted by Republicans to highlight the delay tactics of the Senate Democrats.
I guess to the Dems, going on vacation is more important then doing their job
I'm not up to speed on a lot of parliamentary procedure...but isn't it sort of stupid to let the opposition know when the bloody thing is going to end?
I thought that the real beauty of a filbuster was the fact that nobody really knows when it is going to end.
As I understand it all 50 Republicans have to be in attendance for the 30 hours and only 1 or 2 Democrats. If there were fewer Republicans there would not be enough Senators present to constitute a quorum and the Democrats that are present could then move to end the session. Clearly this is not something that could go on for much more than 30 hours.
As to the nuclear option - there is no nuclear option without 100% Republican support for a change from the 60% rule that is in effect by default right now to a 50% rule on ending filibustering of judicial nominations. At this point I don’t think there is the necessary 100% Republican support and not enough Zell Millers to make up the difference. The only hope is to up the number of Republican Senators to something like 55 or more in the next election and then the nuclear option will be a real option in 2005. I think that is where we are headed.
What will be the reaction of Americans? I believe this could be the first time in history that exposure of confirmation obstruction will be elevated to the level it deserves. It is possible that a loud clamoring of the American people could make the filibuster a success.
Predictions? Unfortunately, a lot depends on how the national media covers it. Recent events convince me that NYTCBSNBCABC will give this the absolute cold shoulder.
In truth, the American people should clamor for breaking the logjam, and if they would take half a minute to study it, they would know the positions of these judges are very compatible with their own.
I fear the American people will yawn once again and turn the channel to Friends reruns.
The 30-hour limit may well be a feint by the Republicans. THey claim 30 hours in hopes that the Democrats plan for 30 hours, but really intend to go until the issue is resolved. Also, this real fillibuster may generate the publicity needed for broader suppoert of the "nuclear option.I dearly hope you are right. That this move is part of an actual plan and not a mere publicity stunt. And I'll be the first to say loud and clear "I was wrong" if you do turn out to be right.
But right now I have my doubts. I don't trust Frist. He seems far too milk-toast-ian for a real fight.
But I hope I'm wrong. I greatly hope I'm wrong.
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.