Posted on 11/20/2002 7:33:18 AM PST by xsysmgr
The Senate's online voting record shows simply that the nomination of Dennis Shedd to a seat on the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals was confirmed last night by a 55 to 44 vote. But there was much more to it than that.
The 44 votes against Shedd, all Democrats, were the most that Democrats have been able to muster against any Bush judicial nominee who came before the full Senate for a confirmation vote. And in that is a message and a threat to President Bush.
Before last night's vote, Democrats worked hard to make sure they could come up with at least 41 votes against Shedd. Doing so would tell the White House that Democrats, even when they become the minority party in January, will still be able to derail any of the president's initiatives. Under the Senate's rules, the minority can filibuster any Senate action, and 60 votes are required to cut off debate. The 44 votes against Shedd, and the party discipline they reflected, showed that Democrats are able and ready to tie up the president's legislation in the coming Senate session.
"The message was, We can stop anything you want," says one Republican. "That was a goal of the Democratic leadership."
The vote was also something of a litmus test for Sen. Mary Landrieu. The Louisiana Democrat failed to win 50 percent of the vote in her reelection bid and now faces a runoff against Republican Suzanne Terrell on December 7. Republicans had been watching Landrieu closely. A vote in favor of Shedd would suggest that Landrieu was so concerned about her chances that she would not risk angering centrists in her state by voting against one of the president's nominees. A vote against Shedd would indicate that she was confident of victory and did not want to anger any of the liberal interest groups who support her campaign, particularly those that provide critical get-out-the-vote efforts.
In the end, Landrieu voted against Shedd. "I think her polling shows that she just needs to turn out her base and she'll win," says one Republican.
Shedd was the target of the strongest opposition inside the Senate Judiciary Committee since the coalition of Democrats and liberal interest groups derailed the appeals-court nominations of Charles Pickering and Priscilla Owen. Democrats portrayed Shedd as "insensitive" to the rights of minorities and hostile to the legal arguments of plaintiffs in employment-discrimination cases.
The nomination might have been defeated in the Judiciary Committee had not Delaware Democrat Joseph Biden announced that he would support Shedd. Since a committee vote would have resulted in Shedd's approval, committee chairman Patrick Leahy instead shelved the nomination. It appeared headed for indefinite delay when, on November 5, Republicans won control of the Senate. Last week, knowing that Shedd would soon be confirmed anyway, Leahy pushed the nomination through the committee on a voice vote (every Democrat except Biden opposed Shedd).
A planned filibuster against Shedd in the full Senate came to nothing, so in the end, Democrats used the nomination to send their "we've got 41 votes" message to the White House. While votes like the 90 to 9 approval of the Department of Homeland Security show that the president can exert enormous political pressure on his Democratic opponents, the Shedd vote showed that they can fight back, hard, whenever they see an opportunity.
It's going to be fun watching the insects destory themselves because they can't learn from their mistakes.
Lott should shove every Bill and nomination onto the floor in a continuous rolling wave until they cry uncle, and then torch them with a USSC nomination.
What a warning: 'we can't organize a filibuster to stop this now...but in theory we could, maybe, and we might be able to do so in the future'
There is a big difference between holding 41 votes in the Senate cloakroom, and orchestrating a public filibuster to stop the most popular President in history in wartime and recession.
Any filibuster will put extreme political heat on certain Dems, and Bush will only need to peel off a few to get his way.
By the way, it's interesting that Biden -- having threatened to vote for Shedd in committee -- voted against Shedd in the vote on the floor last night.
Yep. The response to this threat is clear: Make them actually conduct filibusters. Make them stand up there in front of the cameras for hours and days on end, talking, talking, talking, preventing the Senate from doing anything. Hold daily cloture votes, and force the Dems to go on record as favoring obstruction. See how long they can keep going, and how often they're willing to try it, under those circumstances.
It has always been the Dems goal, tie up everything because they have NO ideas. I say allow them to filibuster all they want and make sure it's a GOP RANT on every soundbite so the people know the Dems are obstructionists holding up progress and putting the chillren in jeopardy abd at risk.
Dems voting yea included:
Hollings
Graham (FL)
Nelson (NE)
Inouye
Byrd
Lincoln
Miller
The 44 nays (only 42 Dems, btw) included:
Dems
Landrieu
Breaux
Carnahan
Cleland
Independents
Barkley
Jeffords
Jesse's Folly, Max & the Widder are already out the door. Landrieu will be gone in 2 weeks and Breaux only voted nay as a feeble attempt to give her small political cover.
In addition to Breaux, Miller, Ben Nelson, Bob Graham, Lincoln and newcomer Mark Pryor (all Southern Dems except for Nelson of Nebraska) will not necessarily vote along partisan lines - especially regarding judicial appointments.
Hollings, Byrd and Inouye normally vote along party lines. Who knows which way Jeffords will go on any issue?
Counting a Terrell victory, the GOP will have 53 votes. They only need 7 Dems to break a fillibuster. At least 6 are possible on many issues.
Hollings, Inouye and Akaka are just a stroke away from giving Dubyah a fillibuster proof Senate.
Tread carefully, Mr. Daschle.
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.