It's time Republicans learned to play hardball (Strom Thurmond filibustered for 24 hours)

townhall ^ | February 26, 2003 | Linda Chavez

[TLBSHOW]

It's time Republicans learned to play hardball

It's time Republicans learned to play hardball. Democrats don't really want to filibuster Miguel Estrada's nomination to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia. They aren't anxious to stay up all night and give marathon speeches on the dangers Estrada purportedly poses to the Republic. Tom Daschle needs his beauty rest, after all.

But the Republicans haven't been willing to call the Dems' bluff. Normally, a filibuster requires a senator to take the floor and keep it, an arcane privilege that prevents the Senate from voting on the issue at hand, unless 60 senators vote to cut off debate.

Former South Carolina Sen. Strom Thurmond (then a Democrat) filibustered for 24 hours and 18 minutes straight in an attempt to kill the 1957 Civil Rights Act. Former senator William Proxmire (D-WI) talked for 16 hours and 12 minutes on a debt-ceiling bill in 1981, and then-senator Alphonse D'Amato (R-NY) filibustered a tax bill for 15 hours and 14 minutes in 1992.

No one seems to have the stomach for a real filibuster today, Democrats or Republicans. Instead of holding the Democrats' feet to the fire to force them to keep talking, the GOP leadership allowed senators to go home for the Presidents' Day recess without voting on Estrada. Now, Republicans are letting the Democrats drag out the debate day after day, without forcing obstinate senators to stay on the floor round the clock and on weekends.

It's understandable that Democrats wouldn't want to talk about Miguel Estrada hour after hour. They have nothing to say. Estrada is obviously well qualified for the position, having received the highest judicial recommendation from the American Bar Association.

His stellar qualifications have earned Estrada a left-handed compliment from Democrat Sen. Harry Reid (NV), who said, "We don't know anything about Estrada, other than he's smart."

The Democrats' real complaint is that Estrada hasn't commented publicly on controversial issues such as abortion and affirmative action. But is it fair to oppose a nominee on those grounds alone?

Ironically, the Democrats and liberal interest groups launched a similar attack on a previous Republican judicial nominee, calling him a "stealth" candidate for his refusal to say how he might vote on abortion cases. When a Republican-controlled senate confirmed that nominee, National Abortion Rights Action League executive director Kate Michelman accused senators of "a dangerous leap of faith (which) placed in jeopardy American women's fundamental right to choose." The nominee -- Justice David Souter -- went on to become a stalwart pro-abortion vote on the Supreme Court.

Estrada isn't likely to become another Souter. Conservatives certainly don't believe he will. But the point is, his failure to inform the Senate about his private views on abortion shouldn't be held against Estrada, even by the pro-abortion ideologues that constitute the Democrats' senate ranks.

Nonetheless, by not exposing the Democrats for the obstructionists they are, Republicans have opened themselves up to the charge by Democrats that it is Republicans who are to blame for bringing Senate work to a standstill with the Estrada nomination. Worse, Republicans have confused the issue by insisting on talking during this phony Democrat filibuster in a misguided attempt to make sure the pro-Estrada side gets equal time in the debate. Anyone tuning in to the debate on C-SPAN wouldn't have any idea from watching this charade that the Democrats are the real holdup on Senate action.

I've seen it time and again in my 30 years in Washington. Republicans play by gentlemen's rules. Democrats play to win. Republican sportsmanlike conduct has cost them dearly over the years. Republican diffidence helped doom Robert Bork's Supreme Court nomination, almost derailed Clarence Thomas' confirmation to the high court, and is likely to defeat Miguel Estrada's appellate court bid as well.

It is probably too late now to force the Democrats' hand. Republicans moreover may believe that if Democrats succeed in blocking Estrada's confirmation, Hispanic voters will punish Democrats at the polls. Don't bet on it. More likely, Hispanics will see that for all their good intentions, Republicans can't deliver when it counts.

[patriciaruth]

waiting for an answer

I suspect you'll get your answer when the "go-no go" decision for the war with Saddam is given. Right now, that is dependent whether Turkey forces us to Plan B or allows us to go with Plan A.

[TLBSHOW]

bttt

[A Citizen Reporter]

Deport,

In how many notes can you name this tune? (You even get dueling songs!)

A) Frist is caving to the Rats.

B) Bush (Powell) is caving to the Turks.

[justshe]

If I understand the 'rules' correctly, we aren't in an ACTUAL filibuster yet. What we have at the moment is an 'open debate', which is why you see the Senate conducting other business, switching off between the Dems and the Republicans, recessing, and going home at night. A true filibuster would involve one party speaking continuously and refusing to yield the floor to the other party.

Every time....and it has to be up to 10 times now...Frist calls for a vote on the nomination, the Dems object (essentially saying they want more debate).

Now....Frist can call for cloture (close off the debate).

In order to do this the following must happen:

1. Wait two days after a filibuster begins.

2. Obtain sixteen signatures on a motion to invoke cloture.

3. Wait another two days before the Senate can vote on cloture.

4. Make sure that three-fifths of the Senate (sixty Senators) vote to end debate.

5. Endure an additional thirty hours of debate before the final roll call vote on cloture.

It's those pesky 60 votes we are seeking at this point.

[TLBSHOW]

Democrats say they will filibuster until they get more information from the nominee about his legal views. Democrats have complained that Estrada is a stealth nominee who refuses to state his positions on issues that are likely to face the court.

Republicans have long considered that a bluff and Tuesday they called it, offering to compile a written list of additional questions from both parties to pose to the nominee.

"I will work toward getting answers to any reasonable list of questions that can be worked out on both sides of the aisle," said Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist, R-Tenn.On Wednesday, Bush repeated the offer, saying he would make

Estrada available to any senator who had questions despite what he called a "double standard" placed on the nominee.
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,79594,00.html

[justshe]

Shoot.....gave away the answer by posting to an earlier post! :-(

Sorry...but you KNOW he wouldn't have answered anyway. He's allergic to questions.

[justshe]

Most dishonest on either your part or the part of the reporter, TLB.

I watched the interaction where Frist offered to submit a list of questions (agreed to by both parties). The Dems refused it....which is EXACTLY what Frist knew they would do.

It was just another way to show how obstructive the Dems are while the Republicans are making every effort to cooperate. It was a made for TV news cycle moment. And Frist played his hand beautifully.

[I Am Not A Mod]

Free Republic Highlights, 2/28/03

[William McKinley]

The problem with that is that, while being a made for TV moment, it didn't show up much on TV. I watch a lot of news, and I still have not seen it.

[Cate]

time for us to gear up and email, write, phone call over the weekend. We can keep the heat on them! I've started this morning sending emails to some of our favorites.

[TLBSHOW]

bttt

[TLBSHOW]

What time does the Senate start today?

[deport]

Shoot.....gave away the answer by posting to an earlier post! :-(

---

No not really as I was asking the 'gifted one' just how he was going to force the dems to debate when they don't have to? As long as they have 41 votes they don't have to do anything more than keep someone available to offer objections to unanimous request. The 24/7 debate tactic is when they don't have enough votes to kill a cloture vote thus they will talk it to death or try. But right now they can kill a cloture vote.... so no need to talk 24/7 and no need to agree to a vote unless they so choose.

But the 'gifted one' keeps saying make them talk. All I'm asking him is how do you do it? So far he's unable to formulate a coherent thought as to how it's done. He needs a cut/paste answer and he hasn't found one yet, it seems.

[TLBSHOW]

when do they start todays session?

[deport]

Does it start today? I don't think so. So you'll have to wait until noon on Monday, Mar. 3 before it's back in session.

Maybe by then you can have a method to keep the dems on the floor talking 24/7. If so maybe you can fax it to Sen. Frist. He'd appreciate it I'm sure.

[TLBSHOW]

Nothing today? Another holiday.........

[cynicom]

TLB...Boy are you politically devoid....

Ole Bill Frist, "Bushs man in the Senate", has got a grand strategy going here whereby he is outfoxing the dems. Any day now, Ole Bill will spring his trap, and, zap the dems will be defeated. Ole Bill is going to whip the Senate into shape any day now.

Just be patient, you just are not capable of grasping this grande maneuver that Bill is pulling off here.

[woofie]

Dick(Cheney) and I were talking about all this and he suggested TLB might be the right man to run the Senate for a while ....do you agree?

[ACAC]

You are wrong. Just because Frist forces the Dems to stay in session all night is not going to change any votes. It would actually backfire and make the Dems dig in even more.

[TLBSHOW]

LOL