Posted on 11/03/2005 4:19:12 AM PST by psychopuppy
By JESSE J. HOLLAND, Associated Press Writer
WASHINGTON - A group of centrist senators who halted a previous filibuster fight is making plans for Supreme Court nominee Samuel Alito, but at least two of the group's Republicans say their decision is already made: no filibuster. ADVERTISEMENT
"I don't believe that, with all sincerity, I could let that happen," Sen. Lindsey Graham (news, bio, voting record), R-S.C., a member of the so-called Gang of 14, said after meeting with the federal appeals court judge whom President Bush nominated to replace retiring Justice Sandra Day O'Connor.
Graham and Sen. Mike DeWine (news, bio, voting record), R-Ohio, were taking their anti-filibuster message to the other Senate centrists at a meeting Thursday. But the group's Democrats were urging them to withhold judgment, saying Alito has been the nominee only since Monday.
The defection of even two members of the group, which decided earlier in the year to support filibusters only in "extraordinary circumstances," would virtually ensure that Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist, R-Tenn., would win a filibuster showdown.
(Excerpt) Read more at news.yahoo.com ...
The dems would need 40 VOTES to Fillibuster, and without ALL seven of the GOP gang on board they don't have it..
"Senator Reid holds that Alito is so extreme, that Alito doesn't even deserve the courtesy of an up or down vote."
BTTT!!!!!!
Yup. I think the gang of 14 will cover the threat, that is, they will not blow the cover that a filibuster will not stand. The Senators like the attention that uncertainty brings.
But there will not be an abuse of cloture, if a cloture motion is filed for the confirmation vote of Alito.
There was NO cloture motion filed for the confirmation vote of Chief Justice Roberts.
Senate Roll Call Votes <- Mash here
I agree with you on the question of a possible filibuster, but I still believe Collins, Snowe and Chafee will vote "no" in the up or down vote.
The constitutional option ultimately requires only 50 + 1 votes, not 61. After several floor votes on the chair's ruling on a specific point of order, with each one requiring less and less Yea votes, it finally reaches the point of requiring a simple majority. Once that's accomplished, judicial filibusters are no longer in order.
That in turn means that judicial appointment would only require a simple majority vote on the floor, with no threat or possibility of a filibuster.
This constitutional option is also referred to as the nuclear option. Clear?
Warner(R), Specter(R) and Nelson(D) lean heavily towards supporting Alito
I suspect McCain(?) and Lieberman(D) will also support Alito.
Voinovich(R), Chafee(R), Snowe(R) and Collins(R) are 50/50
I predict no fillibuster and Alito is accepted with 54 votes.
No, I don't think the dems will really filibuster. As Moose2004 points out too many dems from red states are up for re-election and it would be a diaster.
That's smoke screen by the left to divide us.
As an appealette court judge, he is required to follow precedent set by SCOTUS and rule on the legality of the case (law) before him, not whether it is or was 'right' or 'wrong', or good or bad.
Its only the moonbats like on the 9th circus in CA who like making new law and 'fixing' societies ills (sarcasm).
Acute political instincts ping.
Oh, yes, they heard.
One notes the hopeful attempt at damage control by the media, pretending a split in the group where none yet exists.
I heard Graham speaking about the MoU IMMEDIATELY after it was announced. He was very, very aware that his conservative supporters would be vocal in their opposition to his taking part in the gang. He EXPECTED the phone lines and fax machines to be burning up with their opposition.
Nevertheless, he did it because HE BELIEVED it was the RIGHT thing to do, and that the Senate would operate more smoothly this session if the nuke did not have to be resorted to.
His explaining NOW is not something being done only in retrospect: he was well aware that his conservative supporters would strongly question his judgement. He asked that they watch, wait and see if that judgement was good or bad. Thus far, the results have been good and no filibuster has been attempt by the Senate on judicial nominations.
Agree or disagree with his decision in this case, he followed through on what he believed to be right and for the good of the country. I commend any politician who does this, and who refuses to be governed by polls. We don't elect them to blindly follow OUR orders, but to do what THEY believe to be right. That is why integrity is the single most important quality for an elected official, and why I was so opposed to the 'Toon.
(Other FReepers have told me that DeWine was similarly immediate with his response after the MoU, but I can't personally vouch for him.) If you take a look at the way these two are rated by almost any conservative organization, on nearly every issue, you'll find they almost invariably top the list of good Senators. These two are definitely not RINOs.
Much like Ron Paul, who often breaks with the "R" leadership and whose judgement I similarly find questionable at times, I applaud this type of personal responsibility for their voting. This type of principled independence has to be applauded (unlike the continual grandstanding that McCain does just to get the accolades of the Old Media) and our support should not waiver when they, who are in the middle of the stewpot, choose to do something because they believe they can see better through the murkiness than those of us who are not in the middle of the situation.
I reiterate: I personally will vouch that the "explaining done since" by Graham was immediate, well before the publicity accompanying the MoU, and not in response to the outcry of the conservative base.
Despite some self-congratulating conservative talking heads who contend it was their pressure that made him come around, he made that statement far in advance of any pressure they ever brought to bear. He simply believed this to be the "right" thing to do, and had the guts to buck against his "base" in order to do what he believed to be right.
"Perhaps Graham and DeWine have heard back from their constituents? The people they were sent to serve?"
I think you can be sure they have. DeWine's future hinges on his vote. I'd say the same for Graham. And if McLame has real aspirations to run for prez, he'll have to back Alito as well.
The closer we get to an election the more "conservative" politicians become. Even many democrats.
I hope your prediction is correct and I totally agree with the McCain assignment of "?" for party. When he was interviewed by Colmes, McCain sounded like he just wanted to be Mr. Polite and Reasonable, even to the most liberal Demo Senators that don't give or return that politeness or respect. So McCain loses my respect with that kind of presentation. McCain cares more about his image than the results of his alliances for our nation. Too much is at stake and we need to capitalize on these SCOTUS appointments now. The gan of 14 meets today and they do want to stay in the spotlight.
This isn't "Breaking". They said this days ago.
The reason for that is Senate leadership has deliberately avoided the confrontation.
The confrontation could not be avoided with Bolton, and when Bolton was filibustered (on May 26, after the MOU), Frist's reaction was first to call it a filibuster, and move for reconsideration of the vote. On reconsideration, where cloture also failed to pass, Frist moved the Senate back into legislative session without so much as a peep.
The GOP - "Talk is Cheap" party.
The nomination of Myers to Circut Court has been on the Senate's executive calendar since March. No filibuster has been attempted - gotta give you that point, but I hold the gang of 14 partly responsible for this gross failure of the GOP-lead Senate.
Mr. FRIST. Madam President, needless to say, I am very disappointed with where we sit today. We have had an interesting week, a very challenging week, starting the week on one clear direction and then sidetracked a little bit to what I thought was not an unreasonable feeling in this body that we were going to be working together and that we were going to address the important issues to America.
John Bolton, the very first issue to which we turned, we got what to me looks like a filibuster. It certainly sounds like a filibuster, looking at the vote today, it quacks like a filibuster, and I am afraid, shortly after we thought we had things working together in this body again, we have another filibuster, this time on another nomination--not a judicial nomination but another nomination--the nomination of John Bolton.
It does disappoint me. We had an opportunity to finish and complete this week with a very good spirit. We are going to come back to this issue. As has been said by Senator Biden, as I have said, we are going to revisit it, but I think what America has just seen is an engagement of another period of obstruction by the other side of the aisle, and it looks like we have, once again, another filibuster.
109th Congress - Page S5998 - May 26, 2005
U.S. Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist, M.D. (R-TN) made the following statement today after the Senate denied the cloture motion on the nomination of John Bolton as United States Ambassador to the United Nations:"Earlier today the Democratic Leader gave a speech denouncing the `crossfire of partisan sniping' in Congress and pressed for comity and cooperation. But tonight, after the Democrats have launched into yet another filibuster of a presidential nomination - this time on John Bolton to serve as UN Ambassador - those words seem empty and hollow.
"Some 72 hours after hailing an agreement that sought to end partisan filibusters, the Democrats have launched yet another partisan filibuster.
"Actions speak volumes, and so does inaction. Given the chance to advance the cause of comity in the Senate, the Democrats have chosen partisan confrontation over cooperation. And rather than working to advance America's agenda and act by voting on the floor, the Democrats keep stepping on the brake.
"This is a critical time for the United States and for the world. Because of the President's vision and commitment, democracy is on the march around the globe. And with sensible reform, the United Nations can and should be vital in advancing these developments. But we need to get a UN ambassador in place.
"The cause of peace and international cooperation should not be held hostage to partisan sniping. I would urge my colleagues to end this partisan filibuster of John Bolton."
The general reasons given for getting on with the vote was the importance of the having US representation in the UN. That there are issues the UN should be addressing, and that the US has an important role and input into how the UN will address those issues. The position has been unfilled for over 200 days.
Frist says that Dodd and Biden, or "the other side," is unreasonably denying an up or down vote. That the goalposts keep moving.
ORDERS FOR TUESDAY, JUNE 20, 2005
Mr. FRIST. I ask unanimous consent that at 5 p.m. on Monday the Senate proceed to executive session for the consideration of Calendar No. 103, John Bolton to be Ambassador to the United Nations; I further ask consent that the time until 6 p.m. be equally divided between the two leaders or their designees and at 6 p.m. the motion to proceed to the motion to reconsider the failed cloture vote be agreed to, the motion to reconsider then be agreed to, and the Senate then proceed to a vote on cloture on the Bolton nomination.
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Allen). Without objection, it is so ordered.
On June 20, the motion to reconsider passed via unanimous consent.
Then the cloture motion failed 54-38.
Following the affirmation of rejection of cloture, Frist said:
Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate return to legislative session.Without objection and with no further comment, that is what the Senate did.
I agree with you. Scalito is IN and there will be no fillibuster, because they KNOW, that the Reps under pressure of peple like us!... The withdrawl and Mrs. Miers and the nomination of Scalito, is something that did not go unnoticed by politicians, pundits and the media in general. We, the conservative forces along with our new media, WON this battle.Yes, we matter enough... that people out there are rethinking and trying to figure out 'what is going on...what has changed here,' and the ANSWER is simple: We,the conservative forces, finally learned from the left how to use the Internet, how to organize and how to fight effectively and by our support, a NEW media is emerging that up to this point, seem to represent our point of view. So you see, is all RELATED. One event affects others Something like that :)
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.