Posted on 05/17/2005 7:11:09 AM PDT by CWW
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - On the eve of a high-stakes showdown, a key lawmaker said on Tuesday it was unclear if a group of bipartisan U.S. senators could strike a deal on President Bush's contested judicial nominees.
"It's hard to say. There's a lot of cross-pressures. There's a lot of activity on both extremes of the political spectrum," Sen. John McCain, an Arizona Republican, told CNN. "We'll know more today."
The Senate is to begin what's expected to be several days of debate on Wednesday on two of the seven appeals court candidates blocked by Democrats during the last Congress and then renominated by Bush after he won re-election in November.
Republicans have vowed that if Democrats again stop the nominees with procedural hurdles known as filibusters, they will move to ban such tactics on appeals court as well as U.S. Supreme Court nominees.
Republican leaders say they will have the 51 votes needed in the 100-member Senate to abolish such filibusters. But Democrats argue it is too close to call.
Efforts to find common ground persisted despite a breakdown in talks on Monday between Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist, a Tennessee Republican, and Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid, a Nevada Democrat.
McCain and Sen. Ben Nelson, a Nebraska Democrat, are leading an effort to attract a half dozen largely moderate senators from each party to a last ditch-compromise.
Their proposal would clear the way for votes on some of Bush's stalled judicial nominees while blocking others.
Under the proposal, Republicans would promise not to eliminate judicial filibusters through the end of next year, and Democrats would vow not to use such tactics against any circuit court or Supreme Court nominee except in "extreme circumstances."
Republicans hold 55 of 100 Senate seats. A simple majority is needed to confirm a nominee, but 60 votes are required to end a filibuster.
The aim of Nelson and McCain has been to provide six Democratic votes to clear the way for confirmation votes on some of the disputed nominees and six Republican votes to preserve the judicial filibuster. Nelson was confident he had enough Democrats on board, but was still working to attract a total of six Republicans, an aide said.
Talks between Frist and Reid ended following months of futile efforts to find common ground.
"The negotiations are over," Reid said. "I've tried to compromise (but) they want all or nothing, and I can't do that."
Frist said in a statement, "Republicans believe in the regular order of fair up and down votes and letting the Senate decide yes or no on judicial confirmations free from procedural gimmicks like the filibuster."
I want to b-slap that Harry Reid. He's got that big mouth punk look that just makes me want to go upside his head. He doesn't have black helicopters, does he?
There is always and argument that a bases should be kept open. For example, a "consolidate operations" is more efficient. So - Snowe and Collins fall in line on Filibuster, they make a "consolidate" argument in favor of Kittery, which takes hold. Kittery will win out over Groton, just in time for reelections in 2006.
Just my SWAG.
I thought I read an article that mentioned at least one Democrat by name, but I can't find it back. I may also be confusing it with an article on Bolton's confirmation which will also be close because of the same RINOs.
Or I could simply be losing my mind and imagining things.
Why soitin-nee! I'm almost a New Yawkah, 'cept I'm from Joisey.
Ay-e-e -- Whatsamattahwityoo? Don't you watch da Sopranos??
thanks
Aye, there's the rub. Republicans can NOT promise to allow filibusters(especially for SC Nominees) for whoever the Rats declare as "extreme".
The senate floor is on C-span 2 now
But the title that c-span has on it's site reads "C-SPAN2
The Men Who Stare at Goats"
And who here trusts anything McRino says? Could be a trap.
DBC here addling another layer of tin foil.
Levin is up now
oh heck .. I posted that on the wrong thread
Sorry :0(
Bwahahahahahaaaaaaaa!!
Nooooooooooooo, don't tell me THAT! Please, let me preserve my mental image of you.
My (unsubstantiated) belief is that while partly political, decisions regarding bases are made more on practical grounds than on political spite.
That is true however the President has to sign off on the recommendations of the base closure committee and that could get a little political. I would say that some of the Dems in states that are going to be losing Military Installations might be willing to cut Dubya some slack on any number of things political.
By his news conference, I heard that Liebrman will vote with Reid on this, -if- it comes to a vote.
Now, THAT is a very scary image!! Crazy and Crazier!!
)))))SHIVER(((((
btt
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.