SENATE ESTRADA FILIBUSTER (Live Thread)

[RobFromGa]

Senate Takes Up Estrada again-- 930am EST

Up Now...

C-SPAN2 Internet Link

[fightinJAG]

You're good, wireplay, you really are.

[Credo]

The Republicans are filling up Prime Time.

Is Leahy a drunk?

One thing I'm wondering. I think the Senate Republicans are not asking for a cloture vote because it would establish a precedent for judicial nominees? It then gets down to a behind the scenes game. Talking the Rats to death wears 'em down. I fell asleep at 11 PM. I did see Frist earlier. He is magnificent. I wonder how long ago Lott would have caved? I think Daschle is ticked off because he doesn't have his favorite Republican Leader to roll any more.

[Congressman Billybob]

The quote you attribute to Mark Twain is actually from Otto von Bismark. Here's what he said on the floor of the Bundestag:

"Those who love laws and sausages should not see how either is made."

On the subject of this thread, the Republicans have gone to the mattresses, which former Majority Leader Trent Lott was never willing to do. They are going to break the back of Democrat opposition in the Senate, here and now.

Congressman Billybob

Latest column, now up on UPI, and FR, "Buncombe Rides Again, and Again."

Latest book(let), "to Restore Trust in America."

[mdwakeup]

That's because neither Warren nor Brennan was considered controversial at the time they were appointed. Both were subsequently confirmed easily. I guess I should have said that a recess appointment of a controversial nominee throws down the gauntlet to the Senate.

[fightinJAG]

My recollection is that Estrada did work on Bush v. Gore. But haven't fact-checked lately, sorry.

[Samurai_Jack]

EXCELLENT

[fightinJAG]

This 2-man quorum was very sweet.

Ha,the Rats will be scrambling to read the rule books tomorrow.

[fightinJAG]

Exactly--the Pubs don't want to go to a cloture vote because of the bad precedent. Looks like they are doing a reverse filibuster to prevent or make the Rats think twice about doing a filibuster.

Pubs on the offensive! (Rats ARE offensive.)

[Havoc]

That would be a good question for the Justice dept.

[Anitius Severinus Boethius]

Huh, I always thought it was Twain, seems too witty for Bismark. Oh well, at least I had the right time period of orgination. =)

Yep, brutal politics being played out now.

[RobFromGa]

Why does the 60 vote limit to end a filibuster exist?

What would it take for the Senate to re-write the rule to require a simple majority?

[aristeides]

Those documents about Bork are about Nixon and Watergate????

Bork was Solicitor General during Watergate. At the Saturday Night Massacre, after AG Richardson and Deputy AG Ruckelshaus resigned rather than carry out Nixon's order to fire Archibald Cox, SG Bork became acting AG and fired Cox. A picture of him with his beard appeared on the front pages of the papers -- first time I remember hearing his name or seeing his face.

[aristeides]

Read the recent third volume of Caro's life of LBJ. Changes in Senate rules like the filibuster rule themselves can be filibustered.

[firewalk]

.

[aristeides]

I don't like filibusters of presidential appointments, especially judicial appointments, but Will's argument could just as well be made against the filibuster rule applying to legislation (the Constitution does not give the power to enact laws to congressional minorities or supermajorities,) and I believe courts have rejected that argument.

On amending the filibuster rule, I would not support getting rid of filibusters for legislation. I like to see legislation made harder. I'm willing to consider the idea of amending the rule so that appointments can't be blocked by filibuster.

[aristeides]

It's the DemocRATs filibustering Estrada's confirmation vote that amounts to using the nuke option. A recess appointment would only be an appropriate response to that use.

[Credo]

Why does the 60 vote limit to end a filibuster exist?

It exists because that's how the Senate made its rules to govern debate. There's some good links on this thread to the history of cloture & the filibuster. The Senate initially had no limit on debate until the 20th Century when it established first a 2/3 vote for cloture then wittled it down to 60%.

What would it take for the Senate to re-write the rule to require a simple majority?

It would take at least 60 votes. Probably more. Generally cloture is only an issue on controversial matters and is very rarely an issue on judicial nominations. The dems have adopted a scorched earth policy of blocking Bush's agenda. They're also used to Lott rolling over for them and Frist apparently doesn't want to play like Lott. This grieves Tiny Tom greatly.

[aristeides]

Actually, he is aware of at least two nominees to a yet higher court - Gov. Warren and Sen. Hugo Black - who had no record comparable to Estrada's 15 briefs and oral arguments (10 of them victorious) in cases he argued before the Supreme Court.

Black's confirmation was controversial, but for a different reason: he had been a member of the Ku Klux Klan, and owed the beginnings of his political career to that organization.

[alnick]

All I Know is that in california only an agendized item can be acted upon except in an emergency. Sounds to me like they cleared the board of all other agenda Items so that the dems could not state that the senate was not doing all their work.

Cool. How many democrats were present when they did that? What was on the agenda? I wish I would have stayed up later last night.