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."

[Big Giant Head]

Coop, for the most part, I'm okay with this deal. This ARTICLE , however represents lazy, lousy journalism. Why should an article written to proclaim victory not name names? All anonymous sources. I can write the same article here at home and it have as much value to the conversation as this article.

This is the kind of stuff we freepers usually pounce on.

[Coop]

Neville Chamberlain comes back with the names of three nominees, and we should rejoice?

No, but you also shouldn't commit suicide either. Take a deep breath and rela-a-a-ax.

[Coop]

Do you have anything to offer but rhetoric?

[Coop]

I wonder what a LOSS would look like.

-Withdrawing every conservative judge from the confirmation process would be a loss.

-Publicly going forth with a nuclear option - and losing - would be a loss.

[arasina]

"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."

Prez 43 where aaaaaaaahhhhhhrrrrre you?

[Coop]

This ARTICLE , however represents lazy, lousy journalism. Why should an article written to proclaim victory not name names? All anonymous sources. I can write the same article here at home and it have as much value to the conversation as this article.

I respect that. I merely jumped on here with Frist's comments and have been raising questions or taking issue with poster's comments. The article itself was merely a stepping stone to me.

[Carolinamom]

Sorry, I don't buy it. I did NOT fall off that turnip truck.

[Psalm 73]

"Your post makes no sense at all."

OK - I'll type a little slower for you.
Frist pledges to send up more judicial nominees like Owen -
- meaning he acknowledges that the true Republican base wants more judges like her.
The Rinos that made this deal will either get back in line or be (finally) exposed for the spineless back-stabbers that they are.

[browardchad]

"And that is a shame."

Wow! Frist is one tough cookie! A "shame!" Such soaring rhetoric, such resounding condemnation!

That does it for me, Senator, you're off the hook with nary a strand of your beautifully coiffed hair ruffled. All hail the Senate!

What a joke.

[Coop]

Such soaring rheto

If soaring rhetoric is what you're looking for, you are indeed in the right place. Enjoy your ride.

[A Balrog of Morgoth]

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.

No offense, but I'm something of an afficionado of the old GWB Rope-a-Dope, but this just doesn't feel like one of those.

If this works out in our favor, it's not because of some Rovian masterstroke, it will be because a goodly number of Donk Senators really are too stupid to pocket their winnings and get up from the table.

And I've seen nothing to indicate that any of these seven GOP dealmakers can ever be relied on for anything. 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.

[spintreebob]

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

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.

The problem with the GOP in the Senate is not that they don't agree with me on every point of ideology. The problem is that they lack cajones and are lousy poker players.

[sarasotarepublican]

...it guts the "president power" to appoint judges...shifting power to the senate.

Absolutely accurate! And here is the reason that the Congress is doing all it can to strip away powers from the Presidency. A President has 4 or 8 years to win an election. The Congress, due to the lack of term limits, can remain for their lifetime as KKK Byrd. It makes perfect sense, to me.

[PJ-Comix]

The reason why you don't "buy" it is because this deal was set up to make the Democrats feel good even though ultimately this is a BIG LOSS for them. The fact that it worked so brilliantly is that you don't like the deal. Relax. Watch what happens. When the history of this is written, historians will be amazed at what a BRILLIANT maneuver Bush pulled off.

[Pittsburg Phil]

There's one silver lining in all this uproar over judges and that is that it is even happening. In the past, conservattives got shafted with liberal appointments without much of a peep from the right. That will not likely ever happen again.

But importantly, it is the conservatives who are now on the offensive and it's the libs who are fighting a purely defensive battle. For every punch the Dims block, others get through. In the not so long term, the libs lose. and once the tipping point is reached, the Left's loses turn into a rout.

[demkicker]

"Everything points to a Gonzales nomination,"

I heard there is no way W nominates him - the Rinos like him, but the true Republican base will let the RNC feel their wrath.

I agree. Don't know why people keep speculating on Bush picking Gonzales. I'm certain he knows better. He OWES us a solid conservative especially after his dad put Souter on the court!

[Psalm 73]

"No - you say you're willing to do stuff like that. But..... you'll gripe around the water cooler but not show up when it's time to actually do something."

No reason to insult me - you don't even know me. - or is that how YOU operate and just suppose everyone else does as you do?
(If you DID know me you would never say something like that).

[Obadiah]

The optimistic view is all based on the dims keeping their word and being reasonable in the future. There is no good reason to think they will do so. And they still figure the MSM is their ace in the hole.

You nailed it.

[mo]

Here's why...the Pubbies still think the senate is the local country club-where rule changes can be debated for months and years on end, clever wagers and per hole bets being part of the pleasure and enjoyment of such. The Democrats all play politics like they're born in Hell's Kitchen. Were the Democrats in the same position, and Reid or Daschle the majority leader, this nonsense would have been done and over by 9:01 am January 21st, and the President's nose rubbed in it for the next weekby the MSM, and Hillary Clinton the next Chief Justice by noon.

[Conservativegreatgrandma]

McPain can't get enough Republican support to become the nomineee. Now, maybe if he runs as a RAT, he may have a chance.