Posted on 05/24/2005 9:00:37 AM PDT by Congressman Billybob
Yesterday the Senate reached a Compromise on confirmation hearings on certain judicial nominees. But “compromise” normally means an agreement between opposing parties where both make concessions and commit to keeping the bargain. By that standard, this is no compromise. It is, as Shakespeare wrote in Macbeth, “a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing.”
Allow me to prove the point.
The 14 signing Senators committed to vote to close debate on the nominations of Priscilla Owen, Janice Brown, and William Pryor for various Circuit Courts. They made no commitment on nominees William Myers and Henry Saad. Regarding other nominees for federal courts these Senators said, “Nominees should only be filibustered under extraordinary circumstances...”
In return for this promise, these Senators pledged “to oppose the rules changes in the 109th Congress” (in Rule XXII, the cloture rule).
Extraordinary circumstances will be defined by each Senator. Consider that Ted Kennedy and other rabid Democrats believe it is “extraordinary” any time a Republican (temporarily occupying the White House) makes any nomination.
If, not when, the Democrats filibuster an “ordinary” nominee, all bets are off. We are looking at two schoolchildren in a playground who’ve just reached a deal. Both have one hand behind their backs, fingers crossed.
Lastly, the Compromise demands certain actions of the President, who didn't sign the deal. It reaches the length of Pennsylvania and insists the President “consult” with the Senate before making any future nominations. No President from George Washington to Bill Clinton has routinely done this.
The MSM is hailing this Compromise as a “victory for the centrists in the Senate.” The press has the right number of syllables, but the wrong word. This is a victory for the cowards in the Senate. These Senators signed: Republicans John McCain, John Warner, Susan Collins, Olympia Snowe, Mike DeWine, Lindsey Graham and John Chafee; plus Democrats Robert Byrd, Ben Nelson, Mary Landrieu, Daniel Inouye, Ken Salazar, Mark Pryor and Joe Lieberman.
The Democrats are afraid to stick up for “the traditions of the Senate,” as Harry Reid has dishonestly portrayed it. The most fearful is Ben Nelson. He’s from Florida, which went strongly Republican in 2004. He’s running for reelection in 2006.
But the Republicans are also cowards. Collins, Snow and Chafee are doing their imitation of stray grapes in fresh fruit aisle at the Piggly Wiggly. They are squishy. The saddest entry is Lindsey Graham. He was a man of principle in the House, and when elected to the Senate. But like Joe Lieberman, when push came to shove, he found the political path too steep to climb if burdened with principles.
While we’re on that subject, consider Robert Byrd on his ancient feet, incessantly repeating himself like the elderly brothers in Barry Levinson’s Avalon. Byrd claims to defend “the institution of the Senate.” Why didn't any Senator rise and ask this question: “Is the Senator so senile that he has forgotten when he was Majority Leader and used a majority vote four times to change the procedures of the Senate?” Of course, in the decorous world of the Senate, it would have been phrased more politely
Because of the holes in its logic and terms, this Compromise is no agreement at all. It will fall apart shortly after the three judicial nominees have been confirmed. When Chief Justice Rehnquist resigns in a month and President Bush nominates Antonin Scalia to replace him, all Hell will break loose.
The orgy of mutual self-congratulation on the Senate floor Monday night was like the similar orgy six years ago when Congress declared the federal budget was balanced. The appearance of balance was manufactured by snapping up every penny of the Social Security surplus. The mutual agreement of Republicans and Democrats that they have jointly achieved some magnificent goal was worthless in the face of facts to the contrary.
Far from affirming the Senate as an institution, this Compromise has covered it in shame. The Senate has truly “stepped back from the precipice” – of making a decision. Instead it has substituted a fog of words for a difficult but important decision. The Gunfight at Not-OK Corral is still coming to a theater near you. Just you wait.
The Senate has solved nothing. And the Constitution (remember that, it was in all the papers) has been trashed again.
The Senate has only kicked the can down the road, to confront the same problem under worse circumstances in a month. If that doesn't meet Shakespeare’s definition of idiocy, what does?
About the Author: John Armor is a First Amendment attorney and author who lives in the Blue Ridge Mountains of North Carolina. John_Armor@aya.yale.edu
I agree that it may all come to a head again very soon when the Supreme Court is the subject. I believe they will have to object to a filibuster at that time, because "extraordinary" cannot be used to resist Scalia moving up or a conservative replacing him, since the left/right balance would remain the same on the court.
However, if one of the liberal USSC justices were to retire...
They ought to be glad I am not President - by their attempted power grab and dictating demands on the office of the President - I would probably send them Ken Starr for the Supreme Court to replace Scalia. LOL!
And you are too much the gentleman to mention the "hole".
To: William Creel
I don't think that all three of the nominees will pass the floor vote. The Democrats agreed only to vote to lift the filibuster.
I think there's a very good chance that those Rhino's agreed off the record in the meetings to switch their floor votes on at least one of these three and not confirm.
I think it will be Bill Pryor. Watch how Graham and McCain and the rest parse their words.
They keep giving the subtle disclaimer that the deal only guarantees a floor vote where every senator can vote their conscience not that they will be passed.
This is almost a sure sign that someone was sold out to the Democrats for the deal.
The Democrats really hate Pryor especially after Bush went around them and appointed him by recess appointment.
This way they can get him and say they kept their word and gave him an up and down vote and he just didn't have the votes.
Never mind that before this deal all three did have more than fifty.
This deal stinks.
86 posted on 05/24/2005 11:39:57 PM CDT by mississippi red-neck [ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]
Gee, if you have that much energy and power why don't you just straighten things out now rather than waiting for later?
Amen brother! Amen!
Entirely eloquent.
And, given its accuracy, entirely sad.
Do we still possibly have a latter-day Cicero who will chastise these vermin on behalf of the citizens and what's left of our Republic? Quo usque tandem abutere, Senatores, patientia nostra?
An excellent essay, John, and many thanks!
On of your finest analyses, Congressman. I especially loved the quote from Macbeth. The perfect summation of the "great event."
If the RNC had any sense (a very dubious proposition, admittedly), they would give Snow, Chafee and DeWine the same kind of tremendous support they did Alan Keyes in the Illinois Senate race last year.
I've got a question for you. Who nominated the following judges to the Supreme Court?
Harry Blackmun (author of Roe. v. Wade), John Paul Stevens, Sandra Day O'Connor, and David Souter - all pro-abortion judges?
Answer: Republican presidents. Nixon (Blackmun and Stevens), Reagan (O'Connor), Bush 41 (Souter). If that's the only reason you are staying in the Republican party, it's a false reason to do so. Until Republicans have the courage to dump the "big-tent" idiocy of the plaid-pants guys who are running the party, we'll continue to see the McCains, the Snowes, the Collinses and the Chaffees in league with the RATS at every opportunity. The Dhimmicrats are quite ruthless about enforcing the party line. When's the last time you heard of a pro-life Dem being put up for federal-level office? Not only do the Repubs back pro-aborts, they even back those who are in favor of partial-birth abortion (Snowe and Collins). Leftists do not belong in the Republican party.
The dems don't care about this deal. They want Republican blood.
They got it yesterday, and that will only encourage them.
That's what I've been saying too. At least there are two of us here, who see that. :-)
WHY IS THIS SO INCOMPREENSABLE TO MANY HERE?
THERE IS NOTHING HIDING IN SAAD'S FBI FILE!
There are HORRIBLE things in every single person's RAW FBI file; all or most of it ( with some exceptions and Saad's NOT one of them! ) garbage made up by old enemies and unprovable.
Be prepared to be shocked. You are very naive, perhaps you'll wake up now.
(Denny Crane: "Sometimes you can only look for answers from God and failing that... and Fox News".)
Would it be correct to refer to him as "My esteemed colleague, the gentleass from Arizona?"
One can say that it is "no agreement at all" but that doesn't mean that their are not winners and losers. Once "all hell breaks loose" when that SC vacancy appears, it will be much more difficult for the Republicans to nuke the filibuster option. If they had done it now, the filibuster would be off the table for SC fights in the future. It may seem subtle, but I think we lost.
Good analysis.
I don't really care if the show down is later. To me this looks like a cease fire until 3 of our best nominees get confirmed. I'm elated to finally see them get a vote. If the rats only pause their illegal filibustering and obstruction until 3 judges get confirmed and then want to continue painting public perception closer to the next elections...I don't see it as a negative for the GOP. Any fleeting bad feelings this compromise creates will be diminished when the judges are confirmed.
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.