The FULL TEXT ( from HughHewitt.com )
MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING ON JUDICIAL NOMINATIONS
We respect the diligent, conscientious efforts, to date, rendered to the Senate by Majority Leader Frist and Democratic Leader Reid. This memorandum confirms an understanding among the signatories, based upon mutual trust and confidence, related to pending and future judicial nominations in the 109th Congress.
This memorandum is in two parts. Part I relates to the currently pending judicial nominees; Part II relates to subsequent individual nominations to be made by the President and to be acted upon by the Senate’s Judiciary Committee.
We have agreed to the following:
Part I: Commitments on Pending Judicial Nominations
A. Votes for Certain Nominees. We will vote to invoke cloture on the following judicial nominees: Janice Rogers Brown (D.C. Circuit), William Pryor (11th Circuit), and Priscilla Owen (5th Circuit).
B. Status of Other Nominees. Signatories make no commitment to vote for or against cloture on the following judicial nominees: William Myers (9th Circuit) and Henry Saad (6th Circuit).
Part II: Commitments for Future Nominations
A. Future Nominations. Signatories will exercise their responsibilities under the Advice and Consent Clause of the United States Constitution in good faith. Nominees should only be filibustered under extraordinary circumstances, and each signatory must use his or her own discretion and judgment in determining whether such circumstances exist.
B. Rules Changes. In light of the spirit and continuing commitments made in this agreement, we commit to oppose the rules changes in the 109th Congress, which we understand to be any amendment to or interpretation of the Rules of the Senate that would force a vote on a judicial nomination by means other than unanimous consent or Rule XXII.
We believe that, under Article II, Section 2, of the United States Constitution, the word “Advice” speaks to consultation between the Senate and the President with regard to the use of the President’s power to make nominations. We encourage the Executive branch of government to consult with members of the Senate, both Democratic and Republican, prior to submitting a judicial nomination to the Senate for consideration.
Such a return to the early practices of our government may well serve to reduce the rancor that unfortunately accompanies the advice and consent process in the Senate.
We firmly believe this agreement is consistent with the traditions of the United States Senate that we as Senators seek to uphold.
There is a LOT of freaking wiggle room in that language that the Dems and their media buddies will exploit to restart this whole filibuster charade again the minute ANY Supreme Court nominee is sent up.
It all sounds good right now but just consider how much the Dems have already gotten by stringing out the current situation for MONTHS! One is a FOOL if they think the Dems will now all go quietly. They will cook up some lame excuse why some nominee is an "extraordinary circumstance" and the media will help push the sham along as they always do.
And what about Meyers and Saad? Who are they? And why are these humans, who volunteered and put their lives on hold for this sham process, merely tossed overboard!?
Thanks for posting the full text of the MOU.
It just makes me ill.
If you read it carefully, the ONLY thing the Dems promised is to let 3 (THREE) judges get the up and down vote.
The "extraordinary circumstance" is left to the Dems DISCRETION.
In return for getting THREE judges voted on, the Republicans GAVE AWAY for the duration of the entire Congress the right to eliminate the filibuster on judicial nominees.
As someone pointed out earlier, we have a new majority: the DEMOCRATS, aided and abetted by a bunch of RINO Senators.
I can see 2-3 or 4 defecting to the Democrats, but SEVEN?!
Frist should have kept tighter control on these people. I can't imagine, how 7 Republicans could defect to the Democrats. They DEFIED the will of the people who elected them as Republicans.