Mitch McConnell + John Cornyn = Preemptive Capitulation as a Strategy
Posted on 11/13/2014 4:49:46 PM PST by gaijin
On Nov 21st of last year Harry Reid chose the "Nuclear Option", breaking 40 years of Senate tradition of according the minority party a generous say in the country's affairs:
Reid's claim was that under the traditional rules "the Senate is broken" --under Reid's new rules, federal judicial nominees and executive-office appointments would "negotiate roadblocks" and advance to confirmation votes by a **simple majority** of senators, rather than the 60-vote supermajority that had been the requirement.
Reid's new rules meant the Senate minority would suddenly have a smaller voice, a condition much less generous and much more typical of legislative bodies around the world.
Do any freeps know where this now stands..? Are the current post-election rules simply permitted to remain in the place where Reid suddenly relegated them to..?
Does anyone know if the new Senate intends to "Be Big about their win" and change the Senate rules back to Supermajority from Simple Majority..?
My feeling is that people who leap to make their political bed in a radical new way...
SHOULD BE MADE TO **SLEEP** IN IT.
Does anyone know if our guys are going to Act Like Winners or instead go back to being lick-spittle toadies...?
The GOPe moss backs are only interested in paying back the Chamber of Amnesty for bankrolling their victory. They don’t want to save the country.
If Barry tries to ram through another Marxist on the Supreme Court and it’s voted on anything but a simple majority I can’t imagine anyone voting Republican again.
We went through this before when Gingrich was speaker. Since then we have found out this is not a call based on constitutialism. It is merely an effort for the dims to retain disproportionate power to their status.
Personally, I say F#$k 'em and the donkeys they rode in on. If the dims really want to change they need to dump the idiots leading them and select leaders who are not delusional.
Since we have a Dem president and a Republican senate, I would take it back to 60 votes for conformation. That would make it very difficult for the president to get anyone approved.
Lick spittles...
They don’t need to call it payback, the Republicans need a few years to straighten out what Reid screwed up. That is unless the Republicans want to weasel out on filibuster threats. My guess is the Republican Weasel theory.
I’m guessing that Slimeball Harry will change it back during the lame duck.
The point of requiring a simple majority for executive picks for executive and judicial branch nominees is to expedite the confirmation process. Do you really want to help confirm Obama’s nominees? Enough GOP senators will vote to confirm Obama’s nominees to get a majority vote. It is only by requiring a 60 vote super-majority to bring the confirmation to a vote that Obama’s nominees can be blocked.
Kay, I thought about your answer and I realize my question was a little silly:
I think you believe that the rules will revert to the old arrangement, simply because it is in the GOP interest to make the approval “bar” higher, rather than the unusual place to which it was lowered.
Right?
Then, back to traditional rules would be best, including a constitutional amendment forbidding another "nuclear option".
.
You are correct Zhang. With a Democrat president, McConnell should raise it back to 60 votes for confirmations. When we get a Republican president, he should lower it back to 51.
Theoretically, when your party has the White House, you want the bar lowered. The GOP obviously doesn't have the White House. In practice, the super-majority required for a confirmation vote may have saved us from Harriet Miers.
The Dems should be told to follow their God-King Obama’s advice: “Want more influence in government? Win some elections.”
Grind it in their faces.
And ol' Mitch will say "Oh, um, yeah, sure!" McCain will back Harry - reach across the aisle, don-cha-know...
Some of this is so that purple state Republicans don't have to look blatantly ideological by voting against the President's nominees. Just flip the party labels, and it works the same way when when the Dems have a Senate majority and the GOP the White House.
i have no doubt republicans will not make the democrats live under their nuclear option rules.
I think Reid abused and demonized the GOP to the point that real serious bad feeling are at play here....
Under normal circumstances I think McConnell would play nice, but I believe Reid burned that bridge a long time ago....
I base that on Reid has been quiet as a church mouse pretty much and knows he is in a serious deep hole with across the aisle relationships....
“Since we have a Dem president and a Republican senate, I would take it back to 60 votes for conformation. That would make it very difficult for the president to get anyone approved.”
*****************************************************************************************************
Absolutely! I think some of the other posters who say keep Reid’s rule change don’t understand this. The Senate needs to go back to requiring 60 votes to advance the un-American Obama’s judicial nominees.
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.