Posted on 01/16/2005 1:46:52 PM PST by inquest
WASHINGTON — The Senate's Democratic leader said Sunday that Republicans "would rue the day" if they try to make it harder for Democrats to stall judicial nominees who could not get a vote last year. But Majority Leader Bill Frist, R-Tenn., said he hoped a new "optimistic" climate would take hold now that Nevada Sen. Harry Reid is the top Democrat, succeeding the defeated Tom Daschle of South Dakota, whom the GOP labeled an obstructionist.
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
Politics is a contact sport, sport.
Time to bring out the comfy chairs!
Hmm...well, Times called it the nuc option.
It seems the only way it would pass would be the nuclear option. Other ways require a supermajority.
No need to nuke em. Lets just use a daisy cutter instead ;-)
Sounds like it. :)
I agree! We spent 4 years showing them mercy, and we see where it has gotten us. Nowhere, as far as the judiciary is concerned. If the Senate Republicans haven't got the spine to do what needs to be done, then what is the point of being in the majority? They've been running things long enough.
What I'd like to know is what makes them think that using the nuclear option is any worse than spending 4 years obstructing the judicial nominees of a sitting president, not even allowing a vote on the floor, and with the threat of doing it for another 4. These loathsome little worms need to be neutralized, by whatever means necessary. No more playing nice with playground bullies.
Huh? Are you saying a federal judicial nominee does not require Senate approval before being issued his/her commission as a trial or appellate judge? If so, you could not be more wrong.
That's exactly the rule that Cheney would declare unconstitutional under the Senate rule that allows him to. That is exactly what the "constitutional" and/or "nuclear" option is. He would declare that rule can't apply to appointments that the constitution declares requires 50% plus 1 to pass.
They do it all the time. Congress debates the constitutionality of every bill the pass or rescind. The executive does so every time it signs or vetoes any legislation. If this was not the case then there would be no need for congressional members or executive members to swear an oath to protect the constitution.
"Advise and consent" is not required. It's needed.
???
Screw the anti-American democrats. It's time to follow the consitution. Anybody ever hear majority rules?
The AP article on Fox is misleading.
The plan is for a senator to raise a point of order to close debate on a nominee.
The presiding officer, VP Cheney, would sustain the point of order. The minority would appeal the ruling.
The senate would then vote to table the appeal, which can be done with 51 votes. End of filibuster on this nominee.
The Constitution doesn't enter into it at all because neither the point of order nor the Chair's ruling has anything to do with it.
BTW, this is not a precedent setting scenario. During the '70's and '80's, Sen Robert Byrd used the same tactic four times to alter Senate rules. With 51-vote majorities.
This plan also does not require a change in Senate Rule XXII, which governs the filibuster. If the GOP has the party discipline to give the motion to table 51 votes, then they will not have to do it again and nominees will get their up-and-down votes.
Amen to that. The two parties are locked in mutual choke holds. Someone needs to throw a knee to break the clinch apart. I want this stagnation crap over and done with. Let the chips fall where they may.
All Mr. Cheney need do is to respond to a point of order raised from the floor concerning this point...and, boom, the ersatz supermajority ''requirement'' is history as regards the nomination/advice process is concerned.
He need not make any sort of faux-Constitutional ruling; merely preside over a clarification of the rules of the Senate, which rules are **specifically** in the Senate's purview and control.
I think we need to test the sesolve of the Rats as soon as possible; and at the very first sign of a Filibuster, nuke 'em till they glow!
This nonsense needs to end.
Now.
It might just be the other way around if the democrats try a filibuster again.
frist doesn't have balls.
So the Vice President is supposed to lie?
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.