Posted on 05/28/2005 5:09:47 PM PDT by RWR8189
The judicial filibuster agreement reached by a group of 14 Republican and Democratic senators may be a truce, but it is not a treaty.
It remains to be seen if the Senate’s tradition of up-or-down votes for judicial nominations will be re-established. And make no mistake, every tool for returning to that tradition remains on the table. As Majority Leader Bill Frist and even some signatories to this agreement have acknowledged, this includes the constitutional option.
Those who founded this republic designed the Senate without the minority’s being able to filibuster anything at all. After a rules change made the filibuster possible, the Senate reserved its use to the legislative calendar and by tradition did not use it for judicial nominees. We could have used the filibuster to prevent confirmation of judicial nominations, but we did not do so.
In 2003, after 214 years, that tradition changed when Democrats blocked confirmation of 10 majority-supported appeals court nominees by preventing any confirmation vote at all.
The ends, however, do not justify the unconstitutional means. We must restore the Senate tradition of up-or-down votes for judicial nominations reaching the Senate floor.
On May 23, 2005, a group of 14 senators, seven Democrats and seven Republicans, issued a “Memorandum of Understanding on Judicial Nominations.” The Democrats’ part of the pact was pledging to vote for cloture on three named judicial nominees and to oppose filibusters of future judicial nominations except in undefined “extraordinary circumstances.” The Republicans’ contribution was pledging to oppose changing Senate rules or procedures regarding judicial filibusters during the current 109th Congress.
They announced this deal on the eve of a Senate vote that would have eliminated the judicial filibuster altogether. Four times during the 108th Congress, the Senate failed to invoke cloture, or end debate, on the appeals court nomination of Priscilla Owen. Had that happened again on May 24, 2005, Frist would have sought a ruling from the presiding officer that, after sufficient debate, the Senate should vote on a judicial nomination. I would have joined a majority of my fellow senators in voting to affirm that ruling, re-establishing Senate tradition and making the judicial filibuster a thing of the past.
Recently dubbed the constitutional option, this is a mechanism for changing Senate procedures—without changing Senate rules—that has been used, directly or indirectly, for nearly a century. The filibuster deal was struck, in part, so that the constitutional option would not, at least for now, be exercised.
The operative words here are “for now.” On its face at least, the deal fails to re-establish the Senate’s tradition of up-or-down votes for all judicial nominations reaching the Senate floor. Instead, it may effectively reduce the number of senators who can dictate which nominees receive floor votes to just the handful involved in this deal, since they can make or break the 60-vote threshold for invoking cloture, or ending debate, under Senate Rule XXII.
Loopholes in the Deal
Perhaps even worse, the deal does not even attempt to distinguish the “extraordinary circumstances” justifying future filibusters from the “extreme” standard Democrats say justified their past filibusters. Rather than confine the filibuster, this subjectivity creates loopholes large enough to drive a filibuster through.
The imperative to re-establish Senate tradition remains. This deal does not take the constitutional option for accomplishing this goal off the table. In fact, it was precisely the prospect of using the constitutional option in this very instance that prompted this agreement, including the promise to allow votes on nominees such as Priscilla Owen, Janice Rogers Brown and William Pryor. Some Republican signatories have already said that they will support the constitutional option if the deal’s “extraordinary circumstances” loophole turns out to be a distinction without a difference compared to past practice. If we return to judicial filibusters—and we all know a Supreme Court vacancy looms—we will return to the constitutional option.
The judicial confirmation process needs to be fixed by returning to the tradition of up-or-down votes for judicial nominations reaching the Senate floor. This deal does not directly accomplish this goal, though it remains to be seen whether it might still do so in practice. I agree with Frist that, one way or another, whether by the self-restraint that once guided us or by the constitutional option, that tradition must return.
Sen. Hatch (R.-Utah) is the former chairman of the Judiciary Committee.
Hillary probably has John's FBI File. He was a swinger.
Looks like we lost the Mexican American War anyhow now.
RECUERDA CHAPULTEPAC VATO!
Hillary probably has John's FBI File. He was a swinger.
You are probably right. If the wimps in congress-Dems and Repubs- are so afraid of what's in their files then they shouldn't be there in the first place. Why can't any of them act like decent human beings- then they wouldn't have to worry about what she has on them. I want decent people in congress. Why is this such a difficult thing to ask?
Sorry, but it takes a majority of the majority to make them act like a minority. One senator doesn't hack it.
Don't count your Hatches before they've Chickened.
Frist must announce the McCain does not speak for the party. The way things are now McCain is speaking as he is the majority leader. Frist must be a jacka@@ to let that nut get away with it.
I was just thinking the same thing. What happens to these guys when they quit politics and go on tv? I don't get it. I still remember when Joe Scarborough , before the election was openly giving advice to Lurch on how to beat Bush! Why do they kiss these Rat butts once they get on tv?It's really disgusting.
Ditto
I was thinking similarly; the "nuclear option" is still on the table but no one in the GOP has the balls to use it.
I am so glad you mentioned Joe Scarborough---when he very first started at MSNBC, I could have sworn he said he was a Republican representative in the 90's---but...
you sure wouldn't know it now. When he gets with Chrissy, Ron Reagan, and Howard Fineman, watch out--he is like someone from the south, that, having moved up north has lost his accent, but...
the minute that person steps off the plane in the south--out comes the accent!!!!! Joe is like that, except in reverse---I never see him get with conservatives and revert to a conservative point of view!
McCain got caught on CNN tonight, being a flip-flopper (although he wouldn't admit it)--
On Captital Gang, it was brought out that Gary Bauer, ex congressman, very conservative said that when he asked Bush if he would appoint pro-life judges to the Supreme Court, Bush said he would appoint constitutionalists to the Supreme Court...(this was during the 2000 campaign, I think)--
When Bauer asked John McCain the same question, according to Bauer, McCain said that yes, he would appoint pro-life judges (i.e. use a litmus test)---
Tomorrow, McCain will be asked about this on Wolf Blitzer's Sunday show, and they showed a clip of McCain saying that the conversation with Gary Bauer was "private" and he woulnd't comment on what he did/did not say re: pro-life judges....hmmmmmmmmmmm interesting, NO?
The McCain Mutiny
Queeg(McCain) Ah, but the strawberries! That's where I had them. They laughed at me and made jokes, but I proved beyond the shadow of a doubt, and with geometric logic, that a duplicate key to the wardroom icebox did exist! And I'd have produced that key if they hadn't pulled Caine out of action! I-I-I know now they were only trying to protect some fellow officer and!......(realizes he has been ranting, babbling)
Naturally, I can only cover these things from memory if I've left anything out, why, just ask me specific questions and I'll be glad to answer them...one-by-one...
Yeah. I do not have much hope for it being used now.
Very, very interesting! I will break my vow never to watch the Communist News Network and tune in tommorrow.Thanks so much for the tip!
That show---The Capital Gang is the MOST communist of all of CNNs programming---
Last week, their guest was Teddy Kennedy---and this week, their guest was Charlie Rangel----
Add those two to Mark Fields and Mr. Judy Woodruff, and it is lie after lie, distortion after distortion, and even though Robert Novak and the woman conservative (forget her name) attempt to state the conservative point of view--they aren't very forceful, so the whole show becomes a Bash Bush show every week...
"I'll give to individual candidates to make sure you socialist anti-capitalist liberal infanticide enthusiasts STILL LOSE! BWA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA! You can't stop me from funding conservative Republicans! BWA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA!"
Club for Growth. Highly recommended. F the RNC, and the Republican senators' campaign committee.
The mushy middle always exists. Look at these particular posts within threads:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/1410045/posts?page=115#115
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/1410045/posts?page=76#76
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/1410045/posts?page=121#121
These all detail some history. This is what ALWAYS occurs during a major sea change in American politics. I've seen other articles about other periods, but those will do for now.
The way to finally seize the ground is to increasing the majority, not to dump those marginally on your side.
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.