Posted on 01/24/2015 8:54:55 AM PST by Bratch
I was expecting some action out of the new Congress, but I really never saw this one coming. A group of Republican Senators led by Lamar Alexander (R-Tenn.) and Roy Blunt (R-Mo.) are floating the idea of further extending the nuclear option enacted by the Democrats to take filibusters off the table when considering nominees to the Supreme Court. Clearly wiser heads than myself have been able to determine why this is such a great idea, because I’m not seeing it at the moment.
Top Senate Republicans are considering gutting the filibuster for Supreme Court nominees — a move that could yield big rewards for whichever party controls the White House and Senate after 2016.
The move, still in its early stages, reflects growing GOP confidence in its electoral prospects next year. But it could also have a major immediate impact if a justice such as 81-year-old Ruth Bader Ginsburg steps down, making it far easier for President Barack Obama to get a replacement confirmed…
The 60-vote filibuster threshold would remain for legislation.
The Politico story seems to focus on whether or not they’ll be able to get most of the Republicans to go along with it, and then persuade a sufficient number of Democrats to join them to reach the magic number of 67. Doesn’t that sound just a bit backward? The Democrats are looking at two years in the minority when the President may very well have to nominate a new SCOTUS justice. They should be doing back flips over the idea, since they can often get at least a few Republicans to support a judicial nomination by the President, and they will only need four or five to seal the deal.
I suppose that the analysis from the authors has some merit when they interpret this as a sign of growing GOP confidence in its electoral prospects, but holy moley… that’s a lot of confidence. I wouldn’t say that 2016 is in the bag for the Republicans in any way, shape or form yet. And besides the White House, it’s still entirely possible (though perhaps not likely) that the Democrats could even take back control of the Senate with a big enough Hillary wave. (Again, I’m not saying that will happen, but we would prove that we’ve foolishly learned nothing from recent history if we ruled out the possibility entirely.) If that happens, the Democrats have already demonstrated that they are willing to change the rules as best suits their needs, and they would switch them back and forth on whichever schedule best facilitates their advantage.
If the GOP scraps the filibuster for SCOTUS nominees now, it benefits nobody except Barack Obama and his allies, making if much easier for him to rail through a far more liberal choice than would otherwise be possible. Then, if the GOP manages to lose the White House again and the margin in the Senate remains small, the Democrats will get at least four more years of benefit out of it. If the Republicans do take the White House but somehow lose ground (and control) in the Senate, the Democrats can simply put the filibuster back in place in January of 2017, and what possible evidence of good will exists to suggest that they wouldn’t make such a hypocritical move?
I suppose I’ll wait to hear a more full explanation from Alexander and friends if this proposal actually picks up steam. But for the moment, it just doesn’t make any sense.
GOP: Surrender Masters
They’re all on the same team.
The Democrats are just more honest.
Not that I trust all of the Republican Senators to vote against liberal, anti-constitution justices.
And that is the crux of the problem...
I see this as very bad while a Democrat is still POTUS, because it would be far better for the nation that a SCOTUS seat remain empty than that Republican liberals join with Democrats to put yet another liberal in the SCOTUS.
You just can’t trust people like John McCain, Lindsay Graham, Mitch McConnell, et al.
Importantly, there is *zero* reason to do this now, because the senate makes its own rules every *two* years.
So, in effect, what they are asking for is to make it *easier* for Obama to name a replacement justice.
To hell with that.
1,000
......beginning to remind me of the Geico ads : )
It should be eliminated for all Presidential nominees. Debate should have a limit. The Constitution doesn’t say 40 Senators can block a President’s pick, it says 50.
Frankly, I’d rather see the senate scrapped.
But I guess I can sort of see the GOP’s point on this.
They aren’t going to fight any appointments to anything, so there really is no point in having a fight mechanism.
Which means there’s no point in having a senate either.
So, what are they serving for lunch today in the White Hut?
Lamar Alexander’s support is enough to convince me it’s a bad idea. But why would anyone want to make it easier for Obama to get a SCOTUS nominee approved?
Not that the current batch of Repubicans have the backbone to reject even a clearly extreme leftist nonminee.
YEP
GOPes favorite excuse is “we really couldn’t do anything”. This just gives them another out whilSCOTUS implements more of obamas socialist policies and destroys our Constitution.
Why is it ABSOLUTELY imperative that a vacant Supreme Court seat be filled, should one become vacant? If the situation gets that bad, the Current Occupant could make a recess appointment, which expires with his own departure from office.
We would have been much better served had some filibuster against both Sotomayer and Kagan been exercised, and driven their names from contention. But of course, the Republicans were totally emasculated and powerless at the time. Also, there would have been no viable alternatives that would uphold the word and spirit of the Constitution that would have been submitted.
For later
Now that they win an election they rush to give democrats everything they could possibility want yet were too afraid to even ask for.
Seriously what kind of moron would think this is a good idea when you don’t even control the presidency, and may never again control that presidency. Particularly when you act like this.
perhaps they think we are going to swing in to save their RINO asses by rallying in desperation to keep the other guy out.
But when you act like the other guy we want you both out so we don’t care which of you clings to power.
The slow drift to tyranny is just as oppressive as the fast run, but many times more difficult to overturn and reverse. Ill take the DNC over RINOS that think like them any-day.
How about we dump the 17th Ammendment and go back to state legislatures pick the Senators. That would eliminate the lock step of the Uni-party we seem to be living in
Freegards
LEX
Why would the GOP yield additional power to agents of Satan? Why do they not wait until someone else is in the White House?
Our country has pretty much already slipped away. Why grease the slippery slope, when we already have experienced significant if not permanent damage to our culture, language, and borders?
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.