Posted on 05/23/2005 5:23:07 PM PDT by kristinn
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.
For what it's worth, if McCain had ANY following in the Republican Party, it's gone now.
Also, it will be IMPOSSIBLE for any RINO (like Rudy in NY) to get our Presidential nomination - we no longer have to fear them (if we ever did). We are way too pissed to listen to anything they have to say.
There is a bit of a silver lining here.
I've taught US History and Government for a long, long time and so far I've never read anything in the Constitution which says a president has to consult the Senate BEFORE he makes a nomination. Those fourteen senators - particularly the Republican ones - need a good lesson on separation of powers.
Bush should nominate Bork for something tommorrow AM. The nuke would start ticking by morning coffee break.
Every single time the Republicans try and exercise their RIGHTS as a majority, Reid has a hissy fit, and the Republicans give him what he wants. This is an insult to the nominees who are going to be trashcanned and it is an insult to the President and HIS right under Article II section II of the Constitution.
The only good commie is a dead commie.
It sure looks to me like he did. Pathetic cave by the RINOs gets votes on ONLY 3!
I would like to believe that you are correct, but I am of the opinion that the Dims will claim anything and count on the MSM to carry their water for them.
What is pretty cool about this is that 14 Senators have outed themselves, and their disdain for the system of checks and balances regarding judicial appointments.
There's a winner! Same way they claimed that any "conservative Republican" nomination was an extreme circumstance until 2-3 days ago.
Just words. And as we all know, lefty words mean nothing at all.
"We firmly believe this agreement is consistent with the traditions of the United States Senate that we as Senators seek to uphold."
Who signed it?
Lets not panic here. My understanding is that we definitely get cloture on 3. The other two there is no commitment either way. RINOs agree not to vote for Nuke option I assume as long as the Rats do not filibuster other than psychotic nominees. We MAY be able to live with this. Now that PITA McCain has done his moderate thing he now has to move back to the right and support the Pubs in the next showdown.
The 110th will take the oath of office in January of 2007. Of course several of the Senators involved in this will not have finished their 6 year term by then.
I didn't read all the posts yet but as I said on the C-Span thread, notice how McCain signed on the Dem side.
Nuff' said!!!!
Scalia, for example, can not be Chief! Walk through this memo. W discusses with Senate leaders (Leahy, Fat Teddy, Schmuckie, etc.) and they so "no" to Scalia. W nominates him anyway. Dems invoke extraordinary and threaten a filibuster AND condemn any Republican who doesn't vote with them under the terms of this memo.
IT IS NOT A "DEAL" IT IS A SURRENDER!! EVEN THE FRENCH WILL TAKE NOTES!!
"Hillary/McCain"
I agree
(Denny Crane: "Sometimes you can only look for answers from God and failing that... and Fox News".)
Reid announced that Meyers would be filibustered.
If "watch your mouth" offends you so much you must be very delicate.
"But he did."
So you're telling me its all over?
Well then, let's look at it another way:
When that fearful day comes and the Reps are a minority in the Senate and there is a Dem President, how many of those 7 "moderate" Democrats are going to sit with us and support a deal that gives us veto power over all but 3 of President Hillary's nominees.
If you think this is a victory for Republicans, you are the problem.
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.