[ARCADIA]

What makes this agreement between just a small number of Senators binding?

This block of senators now control the Senate. Neither the Republicans nor the Democrats have enough votes to override their objection. While the document is not legally binding, it is politically binding. You cannot change your stance and violate the agreement without taking a serious hit in credibility. Why would anyone take you seriously, if you refuse to deliver on what you so publically signed onto.

[Protect the Bill of Rights]

Got it...Thanks.

What a pisser.
An up or down vote for a judicial nominee...60 votes
Screw the American Voter...14 votes
John McCain's defeat next election.....Priceless.

[hocndoc]

I called my Senators early this afternoon to thank them for fighting so hard to end the filibusters of judges.

And I will call them in the morning to let them know that I expect them to vote against any deal that would presume to tell the President to confer with the opposition before submitting nominees.

[mississippi red-neck]

You cannot change your stance and violate the agreement without taking a serious hit in credibility.

Unless you are a Democrat or rhino who has no credibility to start with.

The Democrats already broke this same agreement that's how we got here to start with.

They care nothing about credibility,honesty,rules or traditions. It looks like the Republicans would have learned after ten years but they're hopeless.

If the Republicans where a ball team, they are so bad they'd lose a forfeiture.

The traditional gentleman's agreement for over two hundred years ,was that any nominee who made it through the Judiciary committee [voted out] by majority vote ]would be moved to the floor for debate by the other 100 senators and voted on up or down by them.

The Democrats broke this agreement.

They lost the power to tie them up in committee because of the big win by Republicans so they couldn't keep them off the floor.

So they used the filibuster [ unlike the Republicans when the Dem's had the majority] which requires a super majority of sixty to break, to keep them from the floor vote which only requires a simple majority of 51 to confirm.

Before this had only be applied to bills or legislation not people. The reason it was not applied to people is because people [unlike bills] cannot be amended or re crafted to suit both sides. They are either qualified or not.

Before this only those who did not make it out of committee where denied floor access.

This is normal because everything has to make it out of committee before going to the floor.

When the democrats lost numbers and power in the Senate they started making up for their lost votes by using the filibuster to make the Republicans come up with sixty votes instead of 51 thereby nullifying the Republican's electoral gains.