Posted on 03/23/2017 8:11:43 AM PDT by PghBaldy
As the Senate Judiciary Committee was hearing from witnesses for and against Judge Neil Gorsuch, his Supreme Court nomination was delivered a critical blow: Senate Minority Leader Charles E. Schumer (D-N.Y.) said he would join with other Democrats in filibustering Gorsuch — a move that would require at least 60 senators to vote to end debate on the nomination.
Good! I saw articles earlier, hinting that the ‘Rats were suggesting they were open to a “deal” on Gorsuch. That would have meant McCain and Graham giving the next open seat to a ‘Rat.
Filibuster and then nuke. Wear them out and then laugh at them.
Time to get rid of the filibuster.
Use majority on health care, too. And tax cuts.
Let’s just kill it. It’s not served the nation well.
Good Nuke ‘em now and then bring in a real Right Wing conservative for the next couple of Judge picks. No more Mr Nice Guy
They haven’t even finished the hearings and they have already pre-judged him. Not that anyone should be surprised by anything except that they are actually saying it out loud.
The hearings will prove Judge Gorsuch is clearly highy qualified. Confirm him.
If the Dems want to play that way, replace the liberal judges with conservative ones and call it done.
And use the nuke option then, too.
It’s called Cloture which takes 60 votes.
Nuclear option allows cloture with only simple majority.
Nuclear option cannot be filibustered but it will create a long memory.
Time to remind the 10 Senate Dems up for re-election in 2018, this is the time to be independent or get campaigned out of office.
Two options - Eliminate the filibuster or invoke the two speach rule and break the filibuster. I think it was Yogi Berra who said “When you come to a fork in the road, take it”.
I guess we will find out of there are ANY Dems with a conscience in the US Senate.
I doubt President Trump is going to sign off on any “deal” proposed by John McCain. Last time I looked, the executive nominates Supreme Court justices. Not some insane senator from Arizona.
Force the GOP to go for the nuclear option and do away with the filibuster for SC nominees. It will make it that much easier to replace Ginsberg.
Nuke the filibuster, confirm Gorsuch, then nuke Obamacare, then proceed to tax reform.
Back in the LBJ era, Democrat Senator Mike Mansfield came up with the idea of "TWO TRACKING" to allow the senate to keep doing business on an alternate track after a filibuster was announced. In typical government double talk it meant (and still does) that you can say you're doing a filibuster to stall a vote without really doing anything.
If these egg sucking dogs were true to their disgusting values they would just have a big over stuffed 'in box' on the dais that they could pile full of items, resolutions and bills someone doesn't like. Then just one senator could stall or kill anything like one stinking liberal can do with a school play or nativity scene.
Critical blow...this is a critical win. Nuke em with 51 then on to Ruth Buzzy for 51. Judge Kennedy for 51.
Even though I got this from Wikipedia, it’s pretty informative. Sounds to me as if all McConnell would have to do is make a motion, and a simple majority would sustain/establish it:
The nuclear or constitutional option is aparliamentary 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. The presiding officer of the United States Senate rules that the validity of a Senate rule or precedent is a constitutional question. They immediately put the issue to the full Senate, which decides by majority vote. The procedure thus allows the Senate to decide any issue by majority vote, even though the rules of the Senate specify that ending a filibuster requires the consent of 60 senators (out of 100) for legislation, 67 for amending a Senate rule. The name is ananalogy to nuclear weapons being the most extreme option in warfare.
In 1917, a threat to use what is now known as the nuclear option resulted in reform of the Senate’s filibuster rules. An opinion written by Vice President Richard Nixon in 1957 concluded that the U.S. Constitution grants the presiding officer the authority to override Senate rules.[1] The option was used to make further rule changes in 1975.[2] In November 2013, Senate Democrats used the nuclear option to eliminate filibusters on executive branch nominations and federal judicial appointments other than those to theSupreme Court.
Before November 2013, Senate rules required a three-fifths vote of the “duly chosen and sworn” members of the Senate – (usually 60 votes) to end debate on a bill, nomination or other proposal; they also require a two-thirds vote (”present and voting” – 67 or more votes) to end debate on a change to the Senate rules. Those rules effectively allowed a minority of the Senate to block a bill or nomination through the technique of the filibuster. This had resulted in a de factorequirement that a nomination have the support of 60 Senators to pass, rather than a majority of 51. A three-fifths vote is still required to end debates on legislation and Supreme Court nominations.
In most proposed variations of the nuclear option, the presiding officer would rule that a simple majority vote is sufficient to end debate. If the ruling is challenged, a majority would be required to overturn it. If the ruling is upheld, it becomes a precedent. This would end what had effectively become a 60-vote requirement for confirmation of an executive or judicial nominee, or the passage of legislation.
Personally, I’m expecting Ginsberg to assume room temperature of natural causes very soon.
As suggested on ZeroHedge the other day, it’s time to retire the term “Nuclear Option” and start calling it the “Reid Option”, in honor of its creator and patron saint. :)
McConnell just will not install the nuke and get it done.
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.