Posted on 05/23/2005 8:14:11 AM PDT by OXENinFLA
Senate Debate on Nominations Today the Senate resumes debate on the nomination of Texas Supreme Court Justice Priscilla Owen to the Fifth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals. The Senate will conduct its first roll call vote of the week at 5:30pm. Follow the C-SPAN networks & C-SPAN Radio for the debate on Senate rules & judicial nominations. MON., 11:30AM ET, C-SPAN2
--------------------
ORDERS FOR MONDAY, MAY 23, 2005 -- (Senate - May 20, 2005)
[Page: S5714] GPO's PDF
---
Mr. CORNYN. I ask unanimous consent that when the Senate completes its business today, it stand in adjournment until 11:30 a.m. on Monday, May 23. I further ask that following the prayer and pledge, the morning hour be deemed expired, the Journal of proceedings be approved to date, the time for the two leaders be reserved, and that the Senate then return to executive session and resume consideration of the nomination of Priscilla Owen to the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals, provided that the time from 12 noon until 1 p.m. be under the control of the majority leader or his designee and, at 1 p.m., the Democratic leader or his designee be recognized; provided that floor time then rotate between the two leaders or their designees every 60 minutes until 4 p.m., at which time the majority leader or his designee be recognized until 4:45 p.m., to be followed by the Democrat leader or his designee from 4:45 p.m. until 5:30 p.m.
The PRESIDENT pro tempore. Without objection, it is so ordered.
--------------
PROGRAM -- (Senate - May 20, 2005)
[Page: S5714] GPO's PDF
---
Mr. CORNYN. Mr. President, on Monday, the Senate will resume consideration of the nomination of Priscilla Owen to serve as a circuit judge on the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals. Monday will be the fourth consecutive day the Senate considers the Owen nomination.
Over the past 3 days, a number of Members, on both sides of the aisle, have come to the floor to speak on the nomination. We have conducted over 25 hours of debate, and we will continue on Monday. Moments ago, we filed a cloture motion on the nomination, and that will ripen on Tuesday of next week.
On behalf of the majority leader, I remind my colleagues the leader has announced our next rollcall vote will occur Monday afternoon at 5:30. That vote will be on a motion to instruct the Sergeant at Arms to request Senators' attendance. Senator Frist will have more to say about next week's session on Monday.
From SOME or even MANY on FR, but not the forum as a whole.
"Scenario #1 - Republicans try to explain that the Constitution does not require a super majority for advice and consent, etc, etc. and the Republicans "pull the trigger" on the nuclear option, the up or down votes take place, and the press castigates the Republicans for "changing the traditions of the sacred Senate rules." Republicans are viewed as majority bullies.
Scenario #2 - Dems start a filibuster; it goes on for days and the only thing the press can show are videos of "Sheets" Byrd talking about his choice of kitty feed. Republicans hammer the Constitutional requirement for advice and consent (not super majority, filibuster never been used like this before, etc, etc.) The filibuster ends because the Dems finally see the reality of their obstructionist position and the up-down vote takes place.
Which of these is better for us in the long run?"
Doesn't matter because anyway you look at it, only 48% of the country is going to be upset with the Republicans and 52% of the country is going to say that this was a good thing.
The Republicans are the majority and the minority reads the NY Times and watches CNN.
So in the end, if a Dem Senator whines in the woods and only NARAL and MOVEON hears it, will anyone really care?
I'm reading along today, thanks for the comments and narratives everybody.
Perfect description of this whole thing!!
Quod erat demonstratum.
You have answered your own question.
The Dems have NO Good Options and if the Pubs do use the Nuclear option, all that leaves the Rats with is an issue. It's a lame issue and will either fade before 06 or make them look lame to keep whining about it.
But the only important thing is TO GET THESE JUDGES CONFIRMED!
According to today's Roll Call (quoted in ABC's "The Note"), Reid has 4 GOP votes in his pocket. The rumor is that Collins has made a private commitment to him.
The remaining GOP targets: Warner, Specter, Hagel, DeWine. Frist needs to keep 3 of them on our side.
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/TheNote/story?id=156238
I kept telling my daughter she was messy until she learned to clean her room. She's earned more of my respect, but I don't owe her an apology.
I called Graham's DC office and told him no deals, and the staffer was very upset and said, what part of SC are you calling from? I told her out of state but that I contribute out of state and would work to defeat Graham in his next election. The calls are definitely having an effect.
Grassley- Filibusters are meant to ensure minorities have a voice in legislation.
Judicial nominees different than legislation. Owens and brown personally cannot be compromised as legislation. You cannot re-draft a person to get over a filibuster so a majority can rule. Minority stating it is possible, figureatively, to cut off the right arm to gain compromise.
Excellant point.
English, please. I never learned latin.
Listening to Rush - just did a parody of Star Wars called "Revenge of the Left" - LOL
At the very end, you hear Clinton's whiny voice:
"Wait a minute, why am I not in this movie? I was in the first two ..... you need an action figure!!"
It would be a more appropriate analogy if a group of vandals entered your house and trashed your daughter's room daily.
I disagree. If the issue becomes ripe by DEM refusal to vote, now is the best time to make the case and get nominations handled the way they should be. Enough debate for each, and when a Senator has formed a reaon to vote one way or the other, the Senator is obliged to give consent to take the vote. That is fair to all, and it is the only proper resolution. We are not changing the rules, the DEMs did when the refused to adhere to basic parliamentary decency - when you have the information you need to cast your vote, you express willingness to cast your vote.
Why give the DEMs the power to abuse parliamentary procedure, at the expense of the president having the officers of his preference?
It means (translated loosely), "Thus it was shown." It means that your subsequent posts did not show any basis for your contention that Frist had to be "dragged kicking and screaming" into supporting the constitutional option.
In short, your frustration with the fact that Republicans aren't as tough as you would like them to be (which is understandable) has led you to attribute positions to Frist that he has not espoused. This proves my original point that, if Frist prevails, he will be owed an apology from FReepers like yourself who branded him a RINO.
Non carborundum et tu los bastardes.
('Don't let the Democrats grind you down.')
No. The point is that Senate Reps. have failed to live up to their responsibility for 5 years. Go back to when they sent the staffer up the river for daring to leak the original Dem memo on this.
Grassley is a bit boring but I like him. He's saying great things.
Grassley answering your question in considerable detail!
Dang-I had heard that Collins was leaning towards the Frist side---oh, well...
Hagel has aspirations of running for POTUS as as Republican, so he darned sure BETTER vote with the rest of the Republicans not the RINOS-
Specter is the Chairman of the actual committee that all of this falls under, but barely---he almost didn't get the "confidence vote"--so HE darned sure better pay Santorum and Bush back...
Warner has been there too long to be naive about the consequences of what would happen if HIS vote denies the Republicans the right to have Bush's nominees voted on, so HE really better not vote against Frist...
That leaves DeWine---who I have never noticed being an obvious "maverick" ---just once in a while, so he should be able to be talked into voting for what is best for his party, but I don't know him very well at all.
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.