Hatch group may go ‘nuclear’ on judges: Plan would limit use of Rule XXII in Dem filibusters

The Hill ^ | 5/7/03 | Alexander Bolton and Geoff Earle

[ksen]

*yawn!* Wake me if this really happens.....zzzzzzzz.......

[goldstategop]

It would NOT affect the filibuster rule on legislation. It just would not allow the Senate to hold up proceedings on executive nominations. If a majority of Senate wants to vote for a judge, they should be allowed to vote for him. The only downside is we won't be able to block a future Democratic President's federal judicial nominations but if we're entering a long era of conservative dominance by the time that happens the federal bench, including the U.S Supreme Court, will be solidly conservative. Its worth going for broke on this one.

[axxmann]

That was funny! Thanks

[Sir Gawain]

What filibuster? I have yet to see a filibuster.

[So Cal Rocket]

While a filibuster would seem to be more taxing on the side doing the talking, that isn't necessarily the case. The filibusterers need only one person in the Senate chamber at any one time, prattling away. The other side must make sure a quorum—a majority of all senators—is on hand, a constitutional requirement for the Senate to conduct business. If there's no quorum after a senator has demanded a quorum call, the Senate must adjourn, giving those leading the filibuster time to go home, sleep, and delay things even more.

[Doctor Stochastic]

Well, after the next (or next again) election, the Democrats will have a method to shut off Republican filibustering against Hillary's appointment of Bill as Chief Justice.

[skinkinthegrass]

WHAT WORKING RELATIONSHIP?....the RAT BA$TARDS started this senate conflict, we'll end it....NUKE 'em...'rats never took any prisoners...Why sould we?...TO HELL WITH ANY TURDCOATS.

[upchuck]

There's been lots of ideas tossed around about how to break this unconstitutional lock by the RATS.

In the mean time, I like the idea of President Bush making recess appointments of folks sure to drive the RATS crazy, such as Robert Bork, etc.

[goldstategop]

They will, but if there are seven conservative SCOTUS justices I don't think a Justice Bill can help a President Hillary swing the Supreme Court battleship around.

[Migraine]

Don't count your Hatch before he chickens...

Wow... good one! Hope you are wrong, though. That really is a ROTFLMAO!

[deport]

Hatch making a little noise..

I guess we need not count our Hatches before they chicken...... but maybe we'll see some pipping before long.

[princess leah]

The senate has long since gone past "getting along" and we've been watching it ever since Hillary Clinton took up and office and started waving her wand of evil over her "demoncrat associates"...They don't stand for American values, therefore, Republicans need to go ALL OUT to defend those same values before they are ripped out of our hands all together...

[technomage]

One drawback of this proposed tactic is that it might destroy whatever is left of the working relationship between Democrats and Republicans. That is why some legislative experts liken the parliamentary tool to a legislative nuclear bomb.

Is this the working relationship where the Republicans inevitably give up to Democratic pressure?

It this the working relationship where Republicans backbone material disintigrates?

Is this the working relationship where the Dems work with the Pubs AS LONG AS things go their way?

C'mon Republicans!! You know the Dems don't believe in working with you and will stab you in the back NO MATTER what you do!

They know you will not grow a set.

[You Dirty Rats]

They've announced that the only remaining step is for Frist to give approval. At this point, it is inconcievable that Hatch and others would announce this publicly, only to back down later.

My guess is that we are at the "final warning" stage. Neither party wants to have the filibuster removed from judicial nominees, but the Republicans are not going to permit wholesale blocking of nominees. Somebody in the Senate is going to have to offer a way out of this mess, otherwise I believe the Republicans will proceed with evading the filibuster and voting approval on Estrada.

If you notice the examples cited (Fortas and Breyer), both took place in the last year of a Presidential Term (1968 and 1980, respectively). I think a reasonable Senate rule change would be to permit filibusters (i.e. 60-votes required), but only for one year after nomination. That means any nominees Dubya sends up in 2004 can be blocked by 41 Senators; if that is applied for this and all future Presidents, that would be fair IMHO.

[vollmond]

I don't like this. It could have the effect of turning the Senate into a rubber stamp for the executive branch. They need to force real fillibusters. Preferably just before votes on issues the Dems hold dear.

-----------------

How would it do that? If a majority of senators opposed a nominee, that nominee could still be voted down. All this would do is require that an up or down vote is held, and will not allow a minority to kill a nomination that had majority support.

It would also not eliminate the legislative filibuster, as noted in the article above.

I'm not referring to just these judicial nominations. It sounds like they want to make all Executive track items not face the threat of filibuster. The world changes - there's a lot of things Clinton was unable to do even with a Democrat controlled House and Senate because of 43 obstinate Republican Senators. We were holding on for dear life, and I haven't forgotten.

I want the Republicans to make the Democrats hold a real fillibuster, with gavel-to-gavel coverage on C-SPAN2, so the world can see the Democrats reading from phone books just to avoid a vote.

I don't want the Republicans to make a heavy-handed move that could backfire, and burn us a few years from now. Does Chief Justice William J. Clinton sound good? Or Chief Justice Hillary R. Clinton? We need to opportunity to fillibuster those choices to death.

[TheRedSoxWinThePennant]

DO IT NOW!!!! The way to defeat the dems is by taking them on and sticking it to them. Sure they will cry no fair but they will think before they try to stick it to us again.

[goldstategop]

LMAO! If Republicans don't have balls to get judges confirmed the Democrats will know they don't have anything to fear from the majority party and they will trip them up every chance they can get. Its put up or shut up time now for the GOP.

[FLCowboy,]

Republicans as a whole can fight this through the media, yet I've not seen any representative or senator before the cameras lambasting the process the Democrats have chosen.

If republican representatives or senators were to continually hold press conferences, or call in media types to give statements about the tactic the Democrats are using, the next election might solve the problem by eliminating some of the blockers. For example, why aren't the republican representatives in South Dakota going ballistic over Daschele's methods? Why aren't the Florida republican representatives going to the airwaves complaining about Nelson and Graham blocking the Hispanic nominee?

There are public relation issues that can be exploited, and yet I don't see anything but whining.