Replies

He also suggested that Frist push a previous plan to reduce the number of senators needed to break a filibuster. Although that plan would required 67 senators' agreement, "I don't think that is an insurmountable obstacle for some improvements in the process by which the Senate considers judicial nominees," Reid's letter said. Am I the only one who sees this as an opening? The Frist proposal schedules 4 sets of votes with each succeeding one requiring fewer votes to break cloture, ending with simple majority. I think the total hours spent would be less than the 100 he offered. If Reid is saying he might be able to vote FOR this change, and if you get the "gang of 12" of Lott/Nelson on board, you are only 5 votes from the 67 needed. And if Reid could be quoted as suggesting this vote, then if it FAILS the republicans could point out that they tried it REID'S way and he failed to deliver the votes needed, so now they have to use the constitutional option. Frist's rules change was a good idea, and if we can get a vote on it we should.