He is concerned about the time when the Pubies are in the minority again,.....no optimisism....
THe argument about "what happens when the Reps are in the minority" is so bogus because everyone knows that Reps are either too principled or too spineless to filibuster a judicial appt.
Spector is simply calling for a "never mind". Rather than eliminate the filibuster, just have the democrats stop using it, and we don't vote on it.
And later, if the democrats decide someone is "extreme" and filibusters, if the republicans think the nominee is not extreme, they could vote down the filibuster at that point.
In other words, he is simply telling the democrats to stop filibustering the nominees.
Of course he also keeps telling them that he thinks a majority of the senate will vote against one of the nominees if they just let if come to a vote.
BTW, I have to say that while I think all the Bush nominees should be confirmed, I also think that as a matter of principle the parties should release senators from party votes on judges.
Here is the "check and balance". Judges are not selected by one party and modified by the other party. Judges are instead selected by on BRANCH and confirmed by another BRANCH. so the BRANCH should vote as a whole, it shouldn't be a compromise between different parties IN the senate.
Therefore, on judicial nominations, each senator should be free to provide or withhold consent on a nominee, regardless of which party is in the majority, or which party has the white house.
I will also note that the senate has traditionally followed this rule, with many republicans voting for far-left judicial nominees because they had no character flaws.