Gorsuch and the Ghost of Harry Reid

Townhall.com ^ | April 4, 2017 | Cal Thomas

[Kaslin]

What goes around comes around is one of life's undeniable truisms and never more than in the politics of Washington, D.C. (the "D.C." increasingly standing for dysfunctional city).

Last week was Cherry Blossom week in D.C. This week it's Neil Gorsuch week. Republicans must now decide whether to use the "nuclear option," a parliamentary procedure that allows the U.S. Senate to override a rule or precedent by a simple majority of 51 votes, instead of by a supermajority of 60 votes, as a tool for confirming President Trump's nominee to the U.S. Supreme Court.

For those whose primary diet is not politics, a little history will help explain the pedigree of the nuclear option.

The constitutional option has been around in one form or another for more than a century. Writing on the website Think Progress, Ian Millhiser references a Federalist Society article in 2004: "The basic mechanism was devised by Republicans in 1890 to defeat a Democratic filibuster of a bill permitting military intervention in Southern states that prevented African-Americans from voting."

That in itself is interesting since the history of Democratic opposition to civil rights, especially in the South, has largely been forgotten as modern Democrats smear Republicans for their alleged "voter suppression" of minorities. But I digress.

Under the 1890 plan, notes Millhiser, "Sen. Nelson Aldrich (R-RI) proposed introducing a motion asserting that 'when any bill, resolution, or other question shall have been under consideration for a considerable time, it shall be in order for any senator to demand that debate thereon be closed.'"

Aldrich then envisioned, notes Millhiser, "a series of steps where the presiding officer of the Senate would reject the process proposed by his motion, and a simple majority of the Senate would reverse the presiding officer's decision." The plan was never activated because "Democrats caved and allowed a vote on the bill out of concerns that Aldrich would succeed."

That is the choice for Democrats this week with the Gorsuch nomination. Should enough of them vote to get to the 60-vote majority currently required for a Supreme Court nominee, or should they do what their liberal base is demanding and vote "no," prompting Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY), to change Senate rules to allow Gorsuch to be confirmed by a simple majority?

Democrats don't have a credible leg to stand on in opposing a change in Senate rules. That's because their former Majority Leader, Harry Reid (D-NV), changed the rules to confirm federal judges nominated by President Obama by a simple majority over Republican objections.

"Power" is defined as the "ability to do or act" and having the "capability of doing or accomplishing something." As long as Republicans have the majority, they should consider using their power. They have the numbers so they have the ability. The question is, are they capable enough to confirm Gorsuch with little support from Democrats?

Sometimes it appears Republicans are more concerned about negative press coverage, which they will get simply because they are Republicans, than about the wrath of voters. All politicians use power to advance their agenda. And now that Democrats are in the minority, they are using what little power they have, aided by their like-minded media colleagues, to stymie the Republican agenda.

If the nuclear option is necessary to confirm Judge Gorsuch, Republican senators should use it. And they should keep it for all federal judges, just as Democrats did with President Obama's nominees. This is what Democrats fear most, because with a clear conservative majority on the Supreme Court and more conservatives on lower courts they could no longer expect judges, rather than legislators, to advance their agenda and they would have to be accountable to voters.

Sounds to me like a good option.

[GOPJ]

Republicans need to grow a pair and use the “Reid” option.

What are they afraid of? The the press won’t be nice to them? That they won’t get the ‘invites’ to cool democrat parties? That the fake letters they receive from Democrat War Rooms will turn MORE negative?

Come on guys, grow a pair and act like leaders - use the option Demcorats would use against YOU in a New York Minute.

[mad_as_he$$]

“...the Ghost of Harry Reid”

One can hope.

[Steely Tom]

What goes around comes around is one of life's undeniable truisms and never more than in the politics of Washington, D.C. (the "D.C." increasingly standing for dysfunctional city).

The only truism the MSM-Democrats believe in is "what's mine is mine, what's yours is negotiable."

They reject tradition and wisdom, in fact and as concepts.

[Arlis]

Filibuster is NOT in Constitution - simple majority vote for Senate IS.

Let-er rip.

Let the Dems suffer from their own decisions.......if they did suffer from their own decisions more often, they wouldn’t have many followers...

[Verginius Rufus]

Senator Nelson Aldrich was the maternal grandfather of Ford’s Vice President.

[ptsal]

"Power" is defined as the "ability to do or act" and having the "capability of doing or accomplishing something." As long as Republicans have the majority, they should consider using their power. They have the numbers so they have the ability. The question is, are they capable enough to confirm Gorsuch with little support from Democrats?

The Republicans in Congress don't have the gumption to act.

[mrsmel]

We really have nothing to lose. The judiciary now is riddled wth leftists, this is a window to try to correct that as much as we can. We’re not going to have the majority or the White House forever, and we can bet money that as soon as the rats have it again, they will enact whatever they need to enact to advance their agenda.

[LostPassword]

The key Reid quote is that Dems have ALREADY decided to drop filibusters for the supreme court

I really do believe that I have set the Senate so when I leave, we’re going to be able to get judges done with a majority. It takes only a simple majority anymore. And, it’s clear to me that if the Republicans try to filibuster another circuit court judge, but especially a Supreme Court justice, I’ve told 'em how and I’ve done it, not just talking about it. I did it in changing the rules of the Senate. It’ll have to be done again,
They mess with the Supreme Court, it'll be changed just like that in my opinion, So I’ve set that up. I feel very comfortable with that.

There is NO reason for the Rs to think about this. No reason to talk about the "nuclear option". Reid said the filibuster is dead, even for the Supreme Court. This is The Reid Rule and Ds will use it without thinking when they have a chance.

[yefragetuwrabrumuy]

Elizabeth Warren and the ghost of Harry "Jacob Marley" Reid.

[KyCats]

>>This is what Democrats fear most, because with a clear conservative majority on the Supreme Court and more conservatives on lower courts they could no longer expect judges, rather than legislators, to advance their agenda and they would have to be accountable to voters.<<

Says it all right there. This is what it’s all about.

Every leftist gain is through an ideologically driven, corrupt judiciary. And every time the people are finally consulted, that is if we are consulted, we vigorously vote against.

[mrsmel]

Also, what Margaret Thatcher’s mentor Keith Joseph called the “ratchet effect” (when each new bout of government intervention creates a momentum for more) seems to only work one way, in favor of the left.

“as Conservatives conceded more and more ground on state intervention in pursuit of the elusive ‘centre-ground’ between themselves and Labour, they made concessions which later were politically impossible to reverse” ~

“A Conservative Revolution? The Thatcher-Reagan Decade In Perspective”

[I want the USA back]

The media is telling us the Republicans will use the “nuclear option “ and deliberately and intentionally refuses to say that the dems used it first.
This is with full knowledge and awareness.

[mrsmel]

Exactly. The example of California-California!-voting, what was it, three? separate times for Proposition 8, is indicative. The sodomites finally went to the courts to have the will of the people overturned.