[ken5050]

It will be very interesting to see how many votes she does receive. This hasn't been widely discussed, but if it is indeed 60, or more Yeas, then the whole Dem argument against her, and also in favor of her filabuster, is destroyed.

So, will all 55 Republicans vote for her? I think so. Then how many Dem votes will she get, and especially important, how many of them will be from the gang of 14? I think there will be a few other surprise votes in her favor.

If you want to play "whip" along with us, name the Dem votes you thik she'll receive. Not sure what else is on the agenda today. Other judicial nominees, or will Frist call up Bolton? Will Reid try and gum up things..or try to show he willing to be "bipartisan?" ( yeah, sorry..my bad..stupid question)

Also, of note..in case the Senate starts later, Sen Isaackson is scheule live on C-span 1..the call-in segment, at 9:40 , to talk about judicial nominees. Though I wanted Cain to win the Senate seat, I was very impressed with his comments on the Senate floor during the debate.

Another issue I'd like your thoughts on. Do you think Byrd will retire, or run again in 2006? Passed on his performance, and appearance, these past few days, I think he retires. He doesn't seem to have the stamina.

[MinuteGal]

There's a RINO senator named Voinovitch
Who's a Sponge Bob for every DC snitch
His fifteen minutes of fame
Put me into freeze-frame
Please bring me a double of slivovitz

Leni

[Milhous]

Levin recollects Bernstein musing that Americans have a national memory of about seven minutes. If you want your party to succeed Senator Levin you best factor in the Inet's elephantine memory.

[Cboldt]

I was reviewing my notes - the stuff I cut and paste from to contribute to FR, and bumped into material relating to Specter's speech of a couple weeks ago.

What struck me was the reference to Myers - as 1 of 4 that the DEMs were willing to concede some time ago. Myers was also on that list.

Sorry, no link to Specter's speech. The below was prepared at about the time the speech was made ...

Specter's speech mentions 9 of 12 nominees to the Fed Circuit.

Saad, Kavanaugh and Haynes were not mentioned. Disposition of the nominations is a matter of speculation, but the tone of the speech implies at least the 3 nominees not mentioned may be held in committee, if votes are taken on the 9 named nominees. The votes could come with or without calls for cloture.

Nominees with a "+" in front of their name are on the Senate's Executive calendar, i.e., they have moved out of committee. Note that 3 of the "1 of 4 are okay by us" nominees are now on the calendar. The DEMs deal to permit 1 of 4, if accepted, would result in a serious loss of face to the GOP.

Nominees with a "*" in front of their name are the 7 who were subject of cloture motions in the 108th Congress.

All 8 nominees in committee, not just the 3 who were not named in his speech, should be viewed as potential sacrifices, notwithstanding Specter's expressed support for conducting Senate votes on their nominations.

1. +* Myers - believes was close to 60 votes for cloture last session - DEMs have offered as "acceptable" 1 of 4
2. + Griffith - been told that DEMs won't filibuster
3. + Owen - DEMs have offered as "acceptable" 1 of 4 (not hostile to Roe v. Wade)
4. +* Brown - DEMs have offered as "acceptable" 1 of 4 (speeches don't disqualify her)
5. +* Pryor - DEMs have offered as "acceptable" 1 of 4 (he protects overlooked parties)
6. Boyle - informal poll that DEMs won't filibuster
7. Griffin - been told there is no objection
8. McKeague - been told there is no objection
9. Neilson - been told there is no objection

Specter goes on to note instances of cooperation by President Bush with Democratic Senators regarding the selection of judicial nominees.

[Cboldt]

Working on a summary of judicial nominations, what has transparied in their nominations, and where the nominations stand. It might be useful as a tool to isolate the ones most likely to result in threats to deny the vote ("filibuster" in the vernacular) or be held up in committee.

From the names on the memorandum of Monday night, Myers is a candidate for triggering a refusal to vote on the floor, and Saad present both, a test of getting out of committee and of being denied a floor vote.

Circuit Court Nominations Summary

F = 7 subjected to failed cloture motions in 108th Congress
S = positive mention in Specter's May 9, 2005 speech

C = out of committee & on the Senate's Executive Calendar
U = Unanimous consent to make the order of business at a TBD date
D = offer by Democrats to make the order of business at a TBD date

M = MOU by 14 will not vote against cloture
m = MOU by 14 makes no promise regarding cloture

1. -S -- - Boyle, Terrence W. (4th Cir)
2. -- -- - Haynes, William James II (4th Cir)
3. FS C- M Owen, Priscilla (5th Cir) - CONFIRMED 5/25/05
4. FS -U - Griffin, Richard A. (6th Cir)
5. FS -U - McKeague, David W. (6th Cir)
6. -S -D - Neilson, Susan Bieke (6th Cir)
7. F- -- m Saad, Henry W. (6th Cir)
8. FS C- m Myers, William Gerry III (9th Cir)
9. FS C- M Pryor, William H. (11th Cir)
10. FS C- M Brown, Janice Rogers (D.C. Cir)
11. -S CU - Griffith, Thomas B. (D.C. Cir)
12. -- -- - Kavanaugh, Brett M. (D.C. Cir)

Last updated May 25, 2005

Citations

Cloture Motions for 108th Congress

List of Nomination in the 109th Congress Judiciary Committee

Senate Executive Calendar (changes each business day)

Specter's Speech of May 9, 2005 (109th Congress - Pages S4632 - S4636)

Reid's agreement of May 24, 2005 (S5857)