Frist Caves on Filibuster Rule Change for Judicial Nominees

Human Events Online ^ | January 4, 2005 | Robert Bluey

[hinterlander]

Majority Leader Bill Frist (R.-Tenn.) said Tuesday he wouldn't change the Senate's filibuster rule at the start of the 109th Congress, essentially preserving the Democrats' ability to block President Bush's judicial nominees from winning Senate confirmation.

In a speech Tuesday opening the 109th Congress, the GOP leader instead called for cooperation among Republicans and Democrats. "I seek cooperation, not confrontation," Frist said. "Cooperation does not require support for the nominees. Cooperation simply means voting judicial nominees brought to the floor up or down."

Former Judiciary Chairman Orrin Hatch (R.-Utah), writing for HUMAN EVENTS last month, wanted to change Senate Rule XXII, which governs the filibuster, this week. Hatch noted that only 51 votes would be needed (as opposed to 67 once the Senate convenes) to change the rule, thereby preventing a minority of Democrats from permanently holding up a nominee. Hatch’s plan would give Democrats time to debate a nominee, but would eventually cut off discussion after four votes on the Senate floor.

Frist did not completely rule out a change to Rule XXII in the future--"I reserve the right to propose changes … and do not acquiesce to carrying over all the rules from the last Congress," he said--but a Senate aide told HUMAN EVENTS it would be much more difficult to make changes during the middle of the Senate's session as opposed to the beginning.

Frist's reluctance to go along with Hatch's plan--despite offering a Senate resolution in 2003 that did essentially the same thing--leaves Republicans with limited options to counter the Democrat-led filibusters. Because Republicans control only 55 seats-- five short of the 60 needed to overcome a filibuster--they are likely stuck in the same situation they faced in the 108th Congress when Democrats successfully blocked 10 of Bush's nominees.

"Some I know have suggested that the filibusters of the last Congress are reason enough to offer a procedural change today, right here and right now," Frist said Tuesday in his statement. "But at this moment I do not chose that path. Our Democratic colleagues have new leadership, and in the spirit of bipartisanship, I want to extend my hand across the aisle."

Democrats, however, have shown little willingness to cooperate with Frist and allow the Senate to vote on Bush's judicial nominees. In fact, when Bush renominated 20 judicial candidates on Dec. 23 who didn't win confirmation in the 108th Congress, Democrats immediately pounced on the President.

"I was extremely disappointed to learn today that the president intends to begin the new Congress by resubmitting the nomination of extremist judicial nominees," Minority Leader Harry Reid (D.-Nev.) said in a statement at the time. "Last Congress, Senate Democrats worked with the President to approve 204 judicial nominees, rejecting only 10 of the most extreme."

[aynrandfreak]

But the Democrats already used this rule twice when Robert Byrd was Sen Majority Leader.

[Flux Capacitor]

----If Frist can't muster a majority of votes with 55, he doesn't need to be in the leadership position.----

Again, you have to look at just who those 55 Republican senators are. You'll find that a whole lot of them are worthless RINOs who often cannot be counted on to stand with the party.

Bill Frist is not responsible for, nor can he do anything about, the fact that there are enough entrenched RINOs in the Senate to throw all kinds of monkey wrenches into the conservative agenda. To paraphrase Mr. Rumsfeld, "You go to war with the Senate you have, not the Senate you'd wish to have."

----Dems never had a problem like that. Heck, they are doing more with 41 Senators than the Pubs are doing with 59.----

Of course the Dems never had a problem like that -- at just about any given point before 1994, they either didn't have as many defectors in their ranks, or they had a large enough majority that it didn't matter. And they're certainly able to do a great deal with 45 senators: Now that Zell Miller's gone, every single damn Democrat in the Senate marches in lockstep. The GOP, unfortunately, has to deal with its share of troublemakers.

The solution, of course, is for the voters in these RINOs' respective states to get rid of the bastards. That's not up to Frist.

-Dan

[MeekOneGOP]

---

"Some I know have suggested that the filibusters of the last Congress are reason enough to offer a procedural change today, right here and right now," Frist said Tuesday in his statement. "But at this moment I do not chose that path. Our Democratic colleagues have new leadership, and in the spirit of bipartisanship, I want to extend my hand across the aisle."

Democrats, however, have shown little willingness to cooperate with Frist and allow the Senate to vote on Bush's judicial nominees. In fact, when Bush renominated 20 judicial candidates on Dec. 23 who didn't win confirmation in the 108th Congress, Democrats immediately pounced on the President.

"I was extremely disappointed to learn today that the president intends to begin the new Congress by resubmitting the nomination of extremist judicial nominees," Minority Leader Harry Reid (D.-Nev.) said in a statement at the time. "Last Congress, Senate Democrats worked with the President to approve 204 judicial nominees, rejecting only 10 of the most extreme."

---

Man! I hope Frist knows what he's doin'!

I know the 'RATS certainly are shameless and have no sense of honor.

[Digger]

"Frist was whining and threatening the nuclear option. It never happened. And Frist has done nothing to about it."

The Senate sorta sounding like the UN. Wonder why.

[MHGinTN]

Frist is seeking to use the democraps obstructionism against them in 2006 ... at the expense of having real Constitutionalist appointed, but then Frist doesn't give a hoot in hell for what is right only what increases political power. He's disgustingly transparent!

[rodguy911]

The only thing the rats understand is hardball, we have to start playing rough.

[mrsmith]

Frist should know better than I, but I think this was a mistake.

[chiller]

Thanks for that backup. The single senator can call for a cloture vote at any moment, iirc, and if 60 votes aren't there, they lose.

There are those who will argue that that's the price they should pay, but the Dems can put up 1 guy at a time for one hell of along time. Dems can go about their regular life, while all the pubbies are sleeping in their offices.

[Political Junkie Too]

If there is any place in the world that could care less about what the media does it is here on fr.

I think that FR cares MOST about what the media does, which is why so many people spend so much time documenting it and discussing it.

Were you here during the all-night Estrada debate in the Senate? We were watching and discussing strategy all night long, yet the media said hardly a word about it. I do believe that Frist is considering the media impacts as part of his strategy, and is choosing the strategy of giving the Democrats enough rope to hang themselves.

-PJ

[Maigrey]

(censored!))))

[Political Junkie Too]

The other thing to consider about the last Congress is that, with a 51-49 Senate, Senators like Lincoln Chafee had a lot of power with their threats to vote the other way. With a 55-44 Senate, Chafee et.al., don't have that power any more because of the buffer of the extra votes.

-PJ

[Final Authority]

I called it this morning like so many of us here on this forum. GWB never had any intentions of radically changing the course of the judiciary in this nation because it would go against the status quo and the elitism that he represents. Without an activist court certain segments of our population couldn't do what they want and get away with it. Would a conservative court or a constructionist allow a President to essentially enter the USA into trade treaties without applying Constitutional measures? I think not and with a weak and liberal court the elite can do what they damn well please and get away with it.

[rodguy911]

At this point in time I am almost immune to whatever Dan Rather or Peter Jennings have to say. and the NYT is only fit to line my Viking cat's poddy.

Now on the other hand, if Britt Hume or Rush start blasting us I will be very upset but some of the media types just don't get my attention anymore.

[VRWCmember]

"Last Congress, Senate Democrats worked with the President to approve 204 judicial nominees, rejecting only 10 of the most extreme."

Bull Streisand!! They didn't reject the nominees (who were not extreme anyway). They blocked them from a vote. If they had allowed a vote, the nominees would have won overwhelmingly because many democrats who were willing to hide behind a filibuster would not have been willining to go on record with a NO vote against highly qualified minority and women jurists. The fact that the democrats are already putting out this kind of partisan BS is proof that a rule change is needed immediately. They do not intend to allow any reasonable judges on the highest of the appellate courts to receive a confirmation vote at all.

[Tempest]

Frist is NOT a RINO and frankly I'm sick of the half cocked use of the term by so many individuals around here. Frist IS though, being either really naive or really spineless on this issue.

[rwfromkansas]

I am worried the little bastard will end up not holding his promise, but if he pulls that crap, he will feel our wrath like he never has felt before.

[JimRed]

I suspect this means Frist didn't have the votes - which means he lost 5+ votes from Republicans.

Or, hopefully, it is part of the Pub strategery to wait until the Rats try it again, then change the rules in response.

[chiller]

Sounds good, but those were almost all lower court nominatiions.

On the other hand, never before has an obstructionist party prevented so many nominees from receiving a floor vote. Iirc, the pubbies once used this technique on a few atrocious nominees. Payback has been hell.

[sweetliberty]

This is no big surpriose. It's the same bunch of spineless wimps more concerned with feathering their own nests than in serving the people who elected them.

[Phoneman]

I agree with you. This article in no way reflects the text of Sen Frist speech.

I suspect we will all know quite soon whether the rino's are holding sway or not. The President just sent them twenty opportunities to get it right.