Here's the Deal (Why Senate Filibuster Deal Is VICTORY For Conservatives)

American Spectator ^ | May 25, 2005 | The Prowler

[PJ-Comix]

"There is no way this agreement that breaks Democratic obstruction can be spun any way other than as a victory for Republicans and the Bush Administration," said a Republican Senate leadership aide late Monday night, regarding the agreement reached by 14 senators to avert a showdown vote on the so-called nuclear option that would have ended Democratic filibustering of Bush judicial nominees.

The parameters of the deal insure that six of eight obstructed Bush nominees to the federal judiciary will receive an up or down confirmation vote in the Senate. The three most opposed Bush nominees to the court, Priscilla Owen, Janice Rogers Brown and William Pryor, will not have their nominations blocked any longer; also, three other Bush nominees will eventually receive an up or down confirmation vote as well; the only two nominees who still may be filibustered are Michigan judge Henry Saad and William Myers.

Also as part of the compromise, the Democrat moderates promise to prevent any future filibuster of Bush appeals court and Supreme Court nominees. While Democrats were able to have their "extraordinary circumstances" clause inserted in the deal, no one anticipates that such a situation will arise, assuming Democrats keep their promise. And it appears that a number of promises were being tossed around the negotiation room on Monday afternoon.

Several Republican senators involved in negotiations swore that not only will the six Bush nominees be given an up or down vote, but that Democrats in the room were aware that Republicans involved in the negotiations had agreed to vote cloture on Myers as well, and that Democratic negotiators had agreed that such a move could take place, thus also allowing Myers an up or down vote in the Senate. "Assuming that our guys hold themselves to that promise," says another Republican staffer working on the Judiciary committee, "then we're looking at a clean sweep for confirmations."

That said, Republican Judiciary Committee staffers said it would have been difficult to clear Saad for confirmation, regardless of the Democrats' unethical behavior in his case. Democratic Judiciary Committee staff and Senate Democratic leadership coordinated an attack against Saad by providing and then sending Sen. Harry Reid a memo detailing uncorroborated raw interview notes from Saad's confidential FBI background check.

"Saad has served on the bench in Michigan, he has been a public figure for years, he has had close associations with several Senate and House members from the state of Michigan," says a Washington lobbyist who has met with Saad on occasion. "This is an honorable man whose nomination was badly damaged by Democrats. Any future nominee should be aware of what the Democrats will do to destroy a good conservative."

If there are any potential losers in this deal, it is the moderate Republicans who have put their reputations on the line with not only their Republican colleagues, but also conservative voters. "If Myers doesn't get a vote, if a reasonable Supreme Court nominee does not receive a vote, or has his or her nomination blocked, then those moderate Republicans should be held accountable by not only the caucus but their constituents," said the Republican Judiciary staffer.


HOW TRUE TO THEIR word Democrats will be may become apparent in about a month, when Supreme Court Chief Justice William Rehnquist is expected to announce his retirement. Already in Washington rumors are swirling that current Attorney General Alberto Gonzales may be under serious consideration for the empty slot left vacant after one of the sitting justices is elevated to fill Rehnquist's role.. "You look at what he hasn't done in his few months at Justice," says a former White House staffer, "and it makes you think he's really been looking ahead and trying to keep as clear from controversy as he can."

Gonzales has managed to sidestep taking a position on the Terri Schiavo legal battle, and beyond stating his basic support for the eight judicial nominees in limbo, he has avoided being embroiled in this current debate. As well, he has made very few public appearances where anything remotely controversial could have been uttered.

"Everything points to a Gonzales nomination," says a lobbyist aware of the White House thinking on prospective judicial nominees.

One school of thought related to the threat of a constitutional "nuclear" option was that it would ensure the Bush White House an easier time in putting forward a solid conservative as the president's first nomination to the Supreme Court. But Gonzales would be unacceptable to just about every conservative group in Washington and beyond.

"I don't know of any conservative who worked to reelect this president who would be satisfied with a Gonzales nomination," says a Senate Judiciary staffer. "This president was reelected because conservatives want to see a conservative on the Court. If the president has a second opportunity, then perhaps there is room for Gonzales. But only after the president fulfills his promise to voters."

[ElPatriota]

:) Ludicrous!... Maybe in the old days of the MSM, they could have spun this in any way they wanted and we would have taken it.

We LOST this one... Remember the Up & Down 'Principle' part? :)

And guess what, you watch Bush's approval ratings go down even further... don't' ask me why. I just did not see any strong reaction to the defeat in the senate...Which makes me wonder if he is really that committed to put conservative judges in the Supreme C. I just dont' see his passion on this. His whole presidency may beging to unravel bit by bit.

[tlb]

Repeating my comment from an earlier thread. This was a clear win for the republicans:


People need to take a deep breath. The hysteria I'm seeing in some of the nuclear option threads is absurd.

The republicans do not take the rap for "changing the rules", and still move the ball forward. Touchdowns are rarely one long run from across the field. They usually come from a series of short gains.

The logjam is broken. After three years of Ted Kennedy blocking any conservative nominee as a modern day Atilla, the dems now publicly shrug and say no big deal.

If even one of these "unacceptable" judges now are non-objectionable, how can similar Supreme Court nominees be ? And if they are unreasonably filibustered, the onus falls on the dems for breaking the spirit of the deal. I'm not saying that isn't likely to happen but it will be an easier sell for the republican leadership if breaking this deal can be laid at the dems feet.

The senate would have to approve Scalia's elevation to CJ. Before they surely would have blocked him. Now really how can they ?

[Coop]

I just did not see any strong reaction to the defeat in the senate

Because President Bush has a lot more on the ball and is more politically astute than most "strong" reactors around here.

[TeleStraightShooter]

The parameters of the deal insure that six of eight obstructed Bush nominees to the federal judiciary will receive an up or down confirmation vote in the Senate.

That's not how I read the just compromised compromise.
It only takes just 3 of the (D)7 {who are free to self-define "extraordinary circumstances"} to sustain a (D) judicial filibuster.

[ElPatriota]

Well, we'll see... I would love to proven wrong but I have a very bad feeling about this. Things have changed. Politics will not be the same game it used to be. Communications have changed it and because of it, I think conservatives had finally become very active, but when you see something like this... many will stay home the next time around. I for instance, I am appalled with Sen Warner!... and I know many here wrote to him. And the part that pisses off really, no one has said let's go after these weasels. Acceptance... sucks.

[ModelBreaker]

But here's the deal. IF the Democrats break their word (a good assumption) then McCain and most of the other RINOs will beel obligated to vote to end judicial filibusters in the future. That vote which was averted by the deal will be brought up again only this time it will be passed with support from the RINOs who were recalcitrant this time due to the Democrats breaking their word. Think forward about two chess moves.

I don't think this is a correct reading of the problem. The core problem is that the RINO's like the supreme court the way it is. They don't want a conservative supreme court. Neither do Arlen Specter or Charlie Hagel. So there are nine ostensible R's who would like to vote against the president's nominees, if the nominees are like Scalia or Thomas. Voting for the 'senate tradition' of the filibuster is a way to vote against the President but have some political cover. That is the impetus behind this so-called 'compromise.' It gives the squishes cover to do what they want to do anyway.

It's not like the squishes will be interpreting the 'compromise' aggressively to find a way to vote with the president. Quite the opposite. And the whole point of the compromise was to make it easier for the squishes to do the wrong thing when push comes to shove.

The question is, will the Republican leadership be willing to take the steps necessary to put sufficient pressure on the squishes so that the price of betrayal is higher than the benefit of doing what the squishes would prefer to do? At this point, the President had better step in because I don't think Frist has it in him.

[ModelBreaker]

I'm looking forward with pleasure a few months from now when the DUmmies realize they got SNOOKERED on this deal by Bush who they consider to be stupid.

Like how we snookered them on CFR?

[ElPatriota]

And why do I say that about Bush migh be in trouble?... Well, let's see. He made it his mission to reform social security. I and most of conservatives support him, because we respect him and we like him, and he is right, this has to be fixed, but timing is everything. I don't mean to sound like a Rat here.... BOT why Social Security of all the problems we have and not IMMIGRATION reform?... I mean excuse me Mr. president but Immigration relates to security!... and security is related to the war on terrorism, right? and Terrorism relates to 1600 Americas who have died and are dying in Iraq. Do you see my point Mr president? I would say, Immigration would be more important - right now - than social security.

Let's not kid each other, he tries but he is not going anywhere with it... and perhaps it is because people 'sense' we are in the middle of a war! YES. And people are dying as we speak.... Who knows how many will die today!!... and he is worry about Social Security??????

[cc2k]

From the article:

---

HOW TRUE TO THEIR word Democrats will be may become apparent in about a month,

---

Bzzzzzt.

Who true to their word the Democrats are was demonstrated yesterday.

Seven Democrats signed the "memorandum of understanding" and promised to vote for cloture on Priscilla Owen. Six of those same Democrats actually voted for cloture on Priscilla Owen. One was so committed to the agreement that he failed to honor it on the first vote.

This also demonstrates how the media will ignore any violations by the Democrats. Have you heard this on any news show? Seen it in any newspaper? On any news web site?

[djpg]

This will be a conservative victory only if enough of the seven Republicans show the resolve in the future that they are not showing now. If they are shy about the constitutional option now, why won't they find some excuse, e.g., "the Democrats reserve their right to call candidate X an extremist" to avoid a later confrontation?

[samtheman]

This will be a conservative victory only if enough of the seven Republicans show the resolve in the future that they are not showing now.

This will be a conservative victory if the RATS pull a filibuster, Frist (who was not part of this "deal") calls their bluff, and any 2 of the 14 deal-signers vote to end filibusters on the subject of judicial nominees.

Before this deal, Frist had 7 RINOs in the pool of wavering witless wonders, of which he needed 2. (48 + 2 + VP)

After this deal, there are 14 in the pool that could go Frist's way.

We just doubled the size of the pool. Remember, that means that when the RATS finally do filibuster (and they will, they are congenital idiots who can't help themselves) they must persuade 13 out of 14 deal-makers to side with them.

Again, who's arithmetic would you rather be contemplating right now? Ours or the RATS?

[Coop]

Very good point.

[gridlock]

While Democrats were able to have their "extraordinary circumstances" clause inserted in the deal, no one anticipates that such a situation will arise, assuming Democrats keep their promise.

Anybody who does not think this "extraordinary circumstance" will come during the next nomination to the Supreme Court lives in fantasy land.

[skinkinthegrass]

Meaning both sides are free to break the deal as soon as anyone finds a new penumbra. What's mine is mine. What's yours is negotiable.

HA!..I never realized how "Soviet" the 'Rats Senate mindset had become, the old soviet line was, "What's mine, is mine, what ours is mine and whats yours is negotiable." during the '70s SALTS Talks.

[NYS_Eric]

And God forbid that Arlen Spector finds some precedent in Scottish Law, or Voinovich misses another meeting and mistakenly thinks that somehow John Bolton is involved, or we're up to nine.

Under the heading of The Best Humor often has an element of truth in it, I must tell you this line cracked me up.

[Soul Seeker]

Here's the deal. If they had voted against at least half of these people come from true red states. they would have been finished in their re-elections. they don't WANT to vote. Even if it failed, we would WIN because they would be through with that vote.

Don't spin this to me as a good thing.

[Soul Seeker]

IF IT FAILED THE PEOPLE THAT VOTED AGAINST WOULD LOSE! Most of these people come from conservative states and this vote would finish them at their re-elections. Good grief! Why do you think the cowards signed the deal? they didn't want to VOTE!

[fish hawk]

Don't speak too quickly. We have no choice now but to wait and see. No matter which way it goes in the future, those RINOs still have to go.

[Coop]

Why do you think the cowards signed the deal? they didn't want to VOTE!

Then why is that option still in place?

BTW, Judge Owen is now confirmed.

[Soul Seeker]

Really? Its in place? Maybe you should listen to the 14, they don't seem to even know what THEY signed. none of them think it means the same thing.

And I don't give a damn who was confirmed. If it comes at the price of a tryanny of 14 I would rather it not come at all.

Do me a favor? I have no interest in spin. If you don't want to face what has just occured, that is your problem. I'm not going to listen or indulge the fantasy.