How the Senate majority leader played a game of filibuster chicken

Dr. Frist's periodic E-mail/National Review ^ | 6/7/05 VOLPAC E-mail (6/20/05 publication) | Byron York

[Coop]

I think they will get votes this year, but it sounds as if at least one of them will not be confirmed. Hope I'm wrong, but...

[WOSG]

wrt Lindsey Graham wobbling back on his support for this 'deal' ...

They need to feel the heat to see the light!

[Lancey Howard]

CLOTURE!!! Here comes Janice Rogers Brown!
(Oh, this is BIG!)

[Rumierules]

but tactically they gave up nothing in exchange for a few concessions.

They gave up Saad and Meyers who were "exempted" from the extaordinary circumstances standard.

They gave up an up or down vote on evey nominee.

[Leatherneck_MT]

I think this is one that has to be played out to see who won/lost.

If Frist has not backed down on his intent to end Judicial Filibusters, then God Bless him.

This is a story that's a long way from being over.

[Coop]

They gave up Saad and Meyers who were "exempted" from the extaordinary circumstances standard. They gave up an up or down vote on evey nominee.

Horse hockey.

[WOSG]

If that is the case ... that this was just a face-saving move by the Dems to "retreat in good order" ... then indeed Frist will end up looking good.

Proof is in the pudding, ie, proof is in the confirmations that actually happen.

[AFPhys]

I know what you mean. The same old gut-feeling that we may have been had still hasn't subsided fully. That said, I'm glad to read this about Frist, hopefully things are under control better than they sometimes appear.

I keep telling you two to trust me on this - your gut would feel better! They ainna gonna do another "filibuster" of ANY of the president's nominees unless they have at least 5 (or 6) R-Senators who will vote against the nominee (not against cloture). (Unless Cheney is out of town - then Frist will just reschedule)

Bolton will NOT be filibustered. They aren't going to try to maintain that a president needs a more than majority vote for executive branch nominations - that will lose too many of the compromisers, and perhaps Hitlery, too.

[WOSG]

"I think they will get votes this year, but it sounds as if at least one of them will not be confirmed."

Well, then, it tarnishes the claims that this is some victory.

*ALL* of Bush's nominees deserve confirmation.

[Rumierules]

In other words, you will not or cannot argue with any points presented in this article. But you're still right anyway.

Who is avoiding debate now?

[AFPhys]

They haven't really insisted on trying to kill the Bolton nomination with unlimited debate yet. The other day, they just said, "we want to talk some more". Frist either didn't have Cheney available for the big chair and/or had not made sure that the caucus was prepared for the nuke yet, so they could get away with it that time. That won't always be true - in fact, it won't be true the next time a "cloture" vote occurs on Bolton... I guarantee that.

[AFPhys]

LOL ... Thanks!

[funkywbr]

You sound like a Dem yourself thinking everyone in the Rep party walks talks speaks and thinks in lock step.

If that were true I a Jew and originally from NYC sure as hell would never have become a registered Rep.

But that's ok, coming from NYC I've dealt with plenty of aholes, black white red and blue.

[AFPhys]

Frist engineered the whole Senate session since at least January to bring it to this point. He knew about RINO problems, and had a plan to deal with them. I suspected even during the Spectre chairmanship problem he had the nuke in mind during dealings there, too. He didn't want to turn off even one vote - during this whole session. Frist has been masterful, and the Demodogs were just hoping that for whatever reason he would go wobbly on this.

[JLS]

Thanks for the ping and I agree this article is spot on. The GOP is going to get 3 or 6 or 6 plus Bolton nominees confirmd. The GOP did give up something for that, it gave up time. It will cost us a month to 6 weeks to get the goods from the deal prior to any need to change the rules.

But that is gross not net time. With the rule change it still would have taken weeks to get this number of judges confirmed. So the cost is neglible and the threat of a rule change still is hanging out there.

Plus there may be the added bonus of some chasened RINOs. We will see about that as the votes take place.

[AFPhys]

When the Gallup poll came out two weeks ago that showed 69% think all the president's nominees should get an up-or-down vote despite all the media haranguing to cover for the Demodog's treachery, they knew Frist was never going to fold, and they now just have to do whatever they can to save face.

That's all they have left now.

Frist has been masterful.

[Coop]

*ALL* of Bush's nominees deserve confirmation.

No. They all deserve a vote.

[Coop]

Who is avoiding debate now?

Give me something to debate. Your two assertions ain't cutting it, and I'm not expending any energy on them.

[Tribune7]

"This deal was not Senate leadership's capitulation. We didn't agree to it, and don't intend to acquiesce to the deal... In short, we intend to continue to fight for up-or-down votes on each and every nominee."

bump

[AFPhys]

You and I agree that all of the president's nominees deserve confirmation (but I've not seen the closed-door reports - so I could be persuaded otherwise) ... However, the Constitution doesn't state that all nominees must be confirmed - it only dictates that the senate give MAJORITY advise&consent on presidential nominees. That is all I'm asking - not that they be confirmed - but that they get their rightful vote in a reasonable time.