Posted on 03/06/2003 5:02:06 AM PST by SJackson
Edited on 04/22/2004 11:48:21 PM PDT by Jim Robinson. [history]
WASHINGTON -- The plight of Miguel Estrada is a national disgrace. The confirmation to the D.C. Circuit of this highly talented lawyer is being aborted by a Democratic opposition bent on preventing the president and a majority of the Senate from staffing the federal courts as the Constitution requires. And the Democratic "spoiling" method -- filibusters, as presently conducted and entrenched in Senate rules -- are arguably in violation of the same Constitution.
(Excerpt) Read more at online.wsj.com ...
""I have to admit there were some on our side who treated President Clinton in a shabby fashion. [But] I will tell you one thing: We never, ever filibustered a Clinton nominee, not once."
The following is from a liberal site, but it illustrates a point that was made many, many times during the Clinton years: Republican senators were blocking nominations and stalling for time waiting for a Republican to be elected POTUS. And now they seem to be getting upset that Democrats can block nominations too.
Excerpt:
"Stymied by the Republicans' unusually ruthless use of secret "holds" -- refusals to schedule hearings or votes -- and blue slips, Clinton and the Senate Democrats actually went out of their way to accommodate the Republicans, seeking out corporate lawyers and former prosecutors to nominate. When the Democrats sought black, Hispanic, or female nominees, they favored centrists with law-enforcement endorsements and satisfactorily pro-death-penalty views. In some cases, the White House would simply pick the least offensive conservative from a list assembled by Republicans.
But appeasement failed, too. Even as deaths and retirement expanded the number of vacancies -- from a dozen or so near the end of 1994 to 73 by 1998 -- the average number of days it took for the Senate to act on nominees increased, from 159 days during the 104th Congress to 280 days during the 106th. And Republican objections, meanwhile, became increasingly absurd. Last year, for instance, Republicans blocked the nomination of Richmond lawyer Roger Gregory to the Fourth Circuit because, according to Hatch, "Clinton did not consult with senators from the states where the judgeships are located" -- when, in fact, both of Virginia's senators at the time (Democrat Chuck Robb and Republican John Warner) supported Gregory's confirmation. And back in 1997, Senator Phil Gramm first supported and then opposed fellow Texan Michael D. Schattman because, according to a spokesman, Schattman had registered as a conscientious objector during the Vietnam War, and "we question his ability to fairly consider cases brought before him involving the defense industry."
There have been a number of editorials, both before and after the Estrada nomination fracas, that have noted that the Senate judicial nominee confirmation process is broken. Estrada is merely the latest victim. The whole process needs to be changed, and the Senate (both sides) needs to do some soul-searching to come up with ways to make it work, and make it fair.
Make sure all 51 Republicans stay. when the Democrats break up and start taking shift keep a careful count. when they get below 75,wait a bit (till about 3 am) and motion to amend the Senate rule regarding cloture. they will have more than 2/3 of senators present and voting. as soon as the motion is agreed to, Invoke Cloture, and continue as planned.
I like it. Is the problem that the Republicans don't want to stay??
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.