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.
-----------------
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.
Precisely.