 |
 |
 |
Posted on 12/04/2014 1:11:24 PM PST by cotton1706
Former Senate Majority Leader Trent Lott (Miss.) says Senate Republicans should reverse the so-called nuclear option, which Democrats used to reduce the threshold for confirming executive and judicial branch nominees to a simple majority vote.
Lott said incoming Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) should reverse the change of precedent Senate Democrats made last year to defang GOP filibusters against President Obama’s nominees.
Since then, Obama has stocked the federal courts, including the pivotal D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals, with his picks. Republicans are split over whether they should keep the precedent in place now that they are poised to take control of the chamber. They will meet on Dec. 9 to discuss their options.
Lott said restoring the minority party’s power to filibuster nominees could help improve the Senate’s bilious atmosphere.
“I would hope that they would reverse the nuclear option. That would be a sign that we’re not going to have things that way,” he said at a breakfast sponsored by The Christian Science Monitor. “I think it would help get them off on the right foot.”
Lott said he told McConnell and his staff “that I hope they would do that.”
Under regular order, a rules change requires 67 votes, but outgoing Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) circumvented the high hurdle by overturning the ruling of the Senate parliamentarian with a party-line, majority vote.
The tactic is known as the nuclear option because it is seen as antithetical to the Senate’s traditions of operating through consent. Critics say the move severely damaged the fabric of the upper chamber.
(Excerpt) Read more at thehill.com ...
Why?
Sounds like a reasonable compromise to me.
Sure, we can do that... the day before we lose the majority.
“Lott said restoring the minority party’s power to filibuster nominees could help improve the Senate’s bilious atmosphere.”
Just like you did right Trent? You gutless hack.
Trent is right on this one (but probably for the wrong reasons). With the likes of Sissy Graham, John McLame, and other RINOs and members of the GOPe, we can’t count on a “simple majority” to block King Obama. I urge Mitch to revoke and study the nuke option until after the 2016 election. If we win the POTUS and keeps the Senate, then the study is complete and we reinstate the nuke option and thank Reid for the precedent.
There’s not a dime’s worth of difference between the rats and the gop. The same people own them both.
Sorry, House...
For Obama’s last two years, the Republicans will control the Senate — but NOT with a 60 vote majority. Yet!
A simple majority rule mean that Congress can pass bills that cut spending and pare waste and Obama can no longer hide his big-spending idiocy behind Harry Reid.
The same Jackwagon who did a power sharing with Tom Daschle and then got it stuck in his gizzard after they flipped Jumpin'-Jim-Jeffords?
What a Surrender Monkey...
Has he co-opted the new Senate class yet?
LOL! Remember what we used to say in the old days about Trent Lott:
"It's like taking candy from a STUPID baby"
|
|
|
“If the current rules are in place, the liberal judicial and administrative nominations will pass with a coalition of all dems and a few RINO’s “
False.
Nominations have to go through the Judiciary Committee.
They’ll be stopped there- at least the worst will.
********************************************************************************************************
Stopped in the Judiciary Committee? Don’t bet the farm on that.
The membership of the CURRENT Judiciary Committee consists of TWO MORE ‘RATS than Republicans. I’m assuming that the January 2015 New Congress’ Judiciary Committee will have TWO more Republicans than the number of ‘RATS.
The ‘RAT appointees to the Judiciary Committee are ALWAYS picked from Senators who can be counted on to toe the progressive ‘RAT line. You can’t say the same about the Republicans when it comes to standing ONLY for nominees who will defend the Constitution.
Current Congress Judiciary Committee members include Orrin Hatch, Lindsey Graham, John Cornyn and Jeff Flake. These “squishes” can be counted on to vote Obama’s nominees out of committee. I don’t know who will be on the 2015 Congress’ Judiciary Committee, but you can count on the ‘RATS to place ONLY PROGRESSIVE NOMINEE supporters and the Republican leadership to appoint at least half of their membership from the RINO wing of the party. SO ALMOST ALL OF OBAMA’S NOMINEES WILL COME OUT OF THE COMMITTEE SUCCESSFULLY.
And THAT is why we need to go back to the 60 vote closure rule FOR JUDICIAL NOMINEES for as long as Obama (or another progressive ‘RAT is in office.
” This is actually a good idea. If the current rules are in place, the liberal judicial and administrative nominations will pass with a coalition of all dems and a few RINO’s like Grahm, McCain, Murkowski, ect. Changing it back to 60 makes sure some conservatives have to be on board with any nomination.”
Exactly - unless we get a Republican president in ‘16 it doesn’t make any sense to keep it the way it is now.
Members Sessions, Cruz, and Lee aren’t even worth mentioning... because you have such a low opinion of them?
I assume that’s not the case and you are just over-reaching.
Seriously, the Committee is a certain stop to any who aren’t at least marginally acceptable. Nothing’s perfect- including the filibuster- just look at two new members of the Supreme Court.
I don’t know, a large number of Obama nominees might find the 4 necessary RINO votes to be confirmed.
“Members Sessions, Cruz, and Lee aren’t even worth mentioning... because you have such a low opinion of them?
I assume that’s not the case and you are just over-reaching....”
*****************************************************************************************************
Sorry, I’m not “over-reaching”. Those three can be depended upon to vote down Obama’s bad nominees (and, at least Cruz, to possibly vote against ALL his nominees). But there “good” votes in Committee mean nothing if the squishes I mentioned vote with the ‘RAT minority to yield a majority and thus send Obama nominees to the full Senate. In the full Senate, the ‘RATS voting 100% for the nominee (as they WILL) together with a handful of RINOs voting with the ‘RATS (as they WILL) will yield the needed 51 votes to confirm the Obama nominee. The 60 vote closure rule will usually prevent that.
We need to think carefully and clearly on this issue. The ‘RATS (and a number of RINOs) are at war with us and we need to KNOW THAT AND ACT ACCORDINGLY.
“I don’t know, a large number of Obama nominees might find the 4 necessary RINO votes to be confirmed.”
I would keep Reid’s nuclear option for at least a year and put the entire GOP caucus on the spot to do the right thing on any leftist freak that Obama puts forward. If there are any close call votes on some liberal ideologues he pushes, the heat needs to be on the RINO’s to stay in line or face the heat from the voters.
This Trent Lott suggestion is so aggravating. These republicans behave like such wusses. I wish Ted Cruz was majority leader and Mike Lee was the whip. We might get somewhere with them in charge.
Why not share control?
Trent and mitch would caztrate themselves if you handed the a pair of hedge clippers and told them the dems like eunuchs.....
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.