Replies

Regardless, my point is that pubbies did the same thing to at least two of Clinton's nominees, Paez and Berzon, for about four and two years, respectively, by denying to vote for cloture and keeping debate open. It's not a filibuster.

I read the article that you linked to at Slate, and I could find no mention of denying vote for cloture. What is your source for that info. In fact, why would they have to be in that position to block a nomination??? Did not the Republicans control the senate, and therefore the judicial committee? Did Paez make it out of committee? If so, did the Republicans then block an up/down vote on the floor even though the Republican controlled committee okayed his nomination???

If the Paez nomination was blocked in committee, that is entirely appropriate, and nothing like what is happening in this senate. Please correct me, because I personally don't know much about the Paez case, but I do know that most so-called obstruction of judicial nominees that occurred in the Republican controlled senate was just a completely appropriate exercise of majority rule, not minority tyranny.

They were approved by the Judiciary Committee. Click on the link in comment# 102. Then go down about ten lines from the top of the list and find a linked "Page: S1340". You have to do it that way. If I linked it directly, then you would find that thomas.loc.gov uses a temporary URL for these citations. These editorials, among others, apparently were entered into the Congressional Record.

EXECUTIVE SESSION -- (Senate - March 09, 2000)

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

--snip--

I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the RECORD several editorials supporting Richard Paez and Marsha Berzon.

There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in the RECORD, as follows:

[From the Los Angeles Times, Feb. 6, 2000]

Judge Deserves Rousing Approval

Perhaps this week the full Senate will finally take up the nomination of Judge Richard Paez to a seat on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit. With a decisive vote to confirm Paez, the Senate can redeem itself after its disgraceful treatment of this worthy jurist.

--snip--

[From the Los Angeles Times, Jan. 20, 2000]

Infamous Anniversary for Courts

Next Tuesday, four long years will have passed since President Clinton first nominated U.S. District Judge Richard A. Paez to a seat on the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals. It's a sorry moment.

--snip--

[From the Washington Post, March 3, 2000]

The Paez and Berzon Votes

Senate Majority Leader Trent Lott has indicated that the Senate will finally hold up-or-down votes on judicial nominees Richard Paez and Marsha Berzon by March 15. Judge Paez has waited four years for the Senate to consider his nomination, and Ms. Berzon has waited two. Both nominees to the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals are well qualified. It is time both were confirmed.