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.
Shoulda nuked'm. Should have done it long ago. Too much wasted time and effort. I'm just very amused at the reaction of both FR and DU. Both are teed off and about to blow.
Such optimism. I really hope you are correct. I really do. My own sense is this: there is no way this is a face saving move. If it were, ALL the judges being nominated would be up for an up or down vote.
But nooooooo. Just 3. The GOP is not trustworthy if they sink any of the other four via filibuster
(Denny Crane: "Sometimes you can only look for answers from God and failing that... and Fox News".)
"Frist has been betrayed, as have we all."
If Frist doesn't have to accept it, then why does he??? Of course, he is much at fault as anyone else.
Some people around here don't seem to understand that the rest of the country isn't as partisan as are we; they go with the ones who seem to have a solid vision for what they want to do with the power they're asking for.
No one would think the Republicans in the Senate have a clue.
My solution is to shred and mail back every fund raising letter the Republican Party sends me. I include a note explaining that more of the same from the Senate will net them more of the same from me.
And weep for sure. That paragraph that makes mincemeat of Aarticle II tells me that the gang of 14 has elevated itself above its rightful status.
I figured as much.
Why should we condone that behavior on the part of the Dems? It's just like you guys shutting down the jails because there is too much crime. It makes no sense.
Frist can't even herd cats. If he could, according to your analogy, McCain and company wouldn't even be in the position to do what they did. "Knock it off or else." THAT is what Frist's JOB is.
If he can't do the job, he should step down. He looks like a doofus up there going on about everyone holding hands and singing Kumbaya. He is topped only by that aw-shucks crap from Graham.
What was his alternative? Does he now have the votes, in light of the seven Republicans that jumped ship? They've pulled the rug out from under him. What alternative did he have?
This outcome is and was always outside of Frist's control. The DEMs and dysfunctional Senators control the outcome.
"Nominees should be filibustered only under extraordinary circumstances"
I'm sure the Dems will claim extraordinary circumstances to be defined as the nomination of any "conservative Republican" .
(Denny Crane: "Sometimes you can only look for answers from God and failing that... and Fox News".)
His alternative was to force a vote. When those chickensh*t republicans are forced with having a recorded vote, who knows what would happen?
I disagree. If Frist isn't able to control his soldiers, he needs to turn in his sword.
You betcha. But all of this wheeling and dealing has to play out in votes.
Only if they plan on running on the Spineless Rino ticket.
This is how legislatures work. Remember the old saying about sausages and laws. Government is not a football game -- you don't win and then go home. You have to play the exact same people the next day.
So the Republicans should take what they get, and then Bush can always renominate anyone who gets turned down. This only becomes a defeat if we act like it is.
I read it but see no reason to weep. It seems that Dear Leader Reid has managed a retreat in the face of certain defeat. The "Moderate Democrats" could have voted for cloture when Senator Frist asked to end debate. If cloture is invoked, the Constitutional Option cannot be exercised as there would be no reason to request a ruling from the chair. A ruling from the chair affirmed by a simple majority clarifies the issue.
The "compromise" is a cave by the Democrats. The "Moderates" will be unlikely to follow Dear Leader Reid into the dead-end abyss of obstruction again. Once the three are confirmed (like quick), the others must be brought forth, especially Mr. Bolton. The public will have little patience for another obstruction stunt.
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.