Posted on 01/24/2005 6:01:50 AM PST by crushelits
It's been a long time coming, but we now have an approximate date for a confrontation in the Senate on judicial nominations. Majority Leader Bill Frist has announced that if Democrats filibuster the nominations he expects to bring to the floor next month, he'll take action.
Finally. Perhaps the biggest failure of Mr. Frist's leadership in the last Congress was his inability to corral Republicans and stop the Democrats' unprecedented filibuster of 10 of President Bush's appeals-court nominees. It was the first time in U.S. history that the filibuster had been used against nominees to the appellate bench, as a Congressional Research Service paper has amply shown.
Mr. Bush has said he will re-nominate those men and women left over from his first term who are willing, and so the battle is about to be joined again. From the filibuster list, that includes Priscilla Owen, William Pryor, Henry Saad and Janice Brown. These highly qualified nominees had bipartisan support in the last Congress and would have won confirmation by majority vote, but they were denied up-or-down votes on the Senate floor.
Which brings us to the proposed change in Senate precedents that Democrats call the "nuclear option" to make it sound radical. If the Democrats filibuster again, Mr. Frist would ask for a ruling from the presiding officer that under Senate Rule XXII only a simple majority vote is required to end debate on judicial nominations. Assuming 51 Senators concur, the Senate would then proceed to an up-or-down floor vote on the nominee.
(Excerpt) Read more at opinionjournal.com ...
JUST DO IT!
Republican leadership doesn't have the guts to do this. Certainly NOT Bill Frist...
Just do it and nail the 'rats
:-)
I'll believe it when I see it. From what I've seen Frist is no different than Lott, much huffing and puffing and no action. Too bad we only have eunuchs with seniority.
Oh, he'll take action all right. He'll have someone else give a hell of a speech.
Promises, promises.
Prayerfully, just before the Republicans go nuclear, they will have some compassion and give specter a 10 second head start. Just to see him sweat before the big boom.
from Article I, Section 5but that doesn't mean that We The People can't demand some transparency in their operation, by Amendment if necessary.
Each House may determine the Rules of its Proceedings, punish its Members for disorderly Behaviour, and, with the Concurrence of two thirds, expel a Member.
I do fear that the above clause will be used to defuse the nuke. Expect to see many arguments filed based on that section. Something like, 'we concede that a super majority is not necessary for the actual confirmation, but I.5 gives us the unrestrained right to determine the "how"'. Not that I support that argument, just that a blind man can see it coming.
Oh, BTW, punish its Members for disorderly Behaviour ... Sen. Boxer, you have mail. Let's see, what are the words immediately following behaviour?
Not only that, should Roe vs Wade be overturned, the Dems can just blame it on the Repubs, say they'll have to follow the court and not support abortion and "fool us all".
I won't like it when or if the RATS are back in control. But when they are, the Senate should give an up or down vote on nominations. If the majority vote yes, then the person is confirmed. What the RATS have been doing is not in the letter or spirit of what the Founders intended.
It takes 60 to overturn a filibuster.
NUKE EM'!!!
"They certainly don't want the use of a filibuster to become precedence."
But there appears to be enough on both sides of the aisle who do. The Republicans have remained spineless because enough of them would rather put personal political ambition above the Constitution. Lust for power is not limited to just one party and virture is not just a Republican thing.
Filibusters
The WSJ makes an excellent case for the “nuclear” option on judicial-nominee filibusters:
It’s been a long time coming, but we now have an approximate date for a confrontation in the Senate on judicial nominations. Majority Leader Bill Frist has announced that if Democrats filibuster the nominations he expects to bring to the floor next month, he’ll take action.
…
Mr. Frist would ask for a ruling from the presiding officer that under Senate Rule XXII only a simple majority vote is required to end debate on judicial nominations. Assuming 51 Senators concur, the Senate would then proceed to an up-or-down floor vote on the nominee.
…
One of the weakest objections offered by some Republicans is that Democrats will do the same thing in some future Senate. Well, yes, but we doubt Republicans would ever have the nerve or unity to filibuster a Democratic nominee, and Democrats have shown in their willingness to filibuster that they don’t need a GOP precedent to do whatever they want. They’ll “go nuclear” if it suits Ted Kennedy’s purposes, whether Republicans do it first or not.
Worth noting: The Ted Kennedy Democrats have demonstrated their contempt for democracy itself. The Democrat caucus has been virtually monolothic in filibustering President Bush’s nominees, even though they keep losing seats as a result.
In fact, Democrats are so contemptuous of democracy that one Democrat senator and 31 Democrat House members voted to decertify Ohio’s electoral votes and disenfranchise 62 million Bush voters. They’ve become so petty that they needlessly held up a vote on confirming Condi Rice, even though it’s a certainty she will be confirmed.
If the Democrats ever get back into the majority, lord knows that they’ll do. I’m fairly certain a majority of Democrat House and Senate members would gladly vote to overturn the results of a presidential election by decertifying the electoral votes of key swing states. Changes to the filibuster rules would be the least of our worries.
The piece continues:
It’s possible Mr. Frist won’t have to pull this trigger, or at least he won’t if his 55 Republicans hold firm. It hasn’t escaped the notice of the 17 Democrats up for re-election in 2006 that obstruction of Mr. Bush’s judicial picks was one reason Tom Daschle was defeated last November. Colorado’s newly elected Democrat, Ken Salazar, has said he hopes all nominees get an up-or-down vote.
What’s special about Salazar? He was the only Democrat to win an open Senate seat in a red state in 2004. The other 7 went to the GOP. Judicial filibusters are beginning to serve a litmus test for red-state voters to distinguish real moderates from run-of-the-mill Ted Kennedy Democrats.
"Limp Wrist" Frist will do no such thing. Weep for the "Bush Judicial Revolution" that might have been.
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.