Posted on 05/20/2005 4:32:53 AM PDT by ken5050
Truth-
First, you and I obviously come from the same mind set- which is to say- that the GOP leadership should be able to control their own. The only post I made to this issue today stated that I conjecture, that if the GOP leadership is in control of the situation, it will be a 51-49 vote. The Leadership will allow the blue staters to cover their rears, but yet, not put the onus on Cheney.
However, these were matters that I read that cause me concern ((and all the following comes from reading the Board today, as I can’t stand watching the talking heads),
1. Graham said on Late Edition that one of the nominees would be defeated.
2. Nelson said that there’s “trust” developing between the “dirty dozen”-
3. McCain said they have another meeting planned with “more than the 12", planning to attend.
In sum, as to our discourse over these couple of days, if the dirty dozen can’t get their act together, we have no problem. (I still don’t think they can, because they lack trust in each other- a point you may have read in David Brock’s article posted yesterday.)
But, if somehow, a coalition of 12 Senators decide to vote as a solid, unyielding block, they will be impervious to pressure- because neither the Dems or GOP can win without the that block. Beyond that, the Senate’s propensity to want to “compromise”, will be influenced by this block.
So, finally, here’s my thoughts based on the above:
If there’s an up/down vote on the nominees, I think you get most of the RINO’s.
If there’s a vote on the nuclear option, -Warner, Chaffee, Snow, McCain are definite no’s; Collins and Graham are on the bubble- Graham being the most susceptible to pressure. But, I think the GOP will get 1 of the 2.
However, if these mavericks form the alliance with Nelson and 5 other committed Dems, I think what Graham said today may be an actuality- which is that 1 or more of the nominees goes down without ever reaching the nuclear option. There will be some compromise as to which nominees will be passed.
That’s my best guess, anyway. :)
The language in the point of order is highly relevant, as it will determine what is "won" if the point of order passes. It will also determine the degree of objection by individual Senators. I.e., some may be okay with a point of order that calls only for getting to the vote for Owen.
The point of order will of course ask for a vote on Owen, since sufficient debate has elapsed. It may express willingness for further debate before taking the vote on the nominee. It isn't clear to me whether the point of order can request a change in future procedure; or, if the point of order itself provides sufficient precedent for future nominees, etc.
There are two votes in the flow chart that can lead to failure. The first would be a rejection of the GOP motion to table the DEM appeal. If this vote fails, the point of order will be submitted to the Senate for debate. As one might infer from the above paragraph, the depth of debate will be driven by the language in the point of order.
The second would be outright rejection of the point of order, which could happen whether or not the point of order is the subject of debate.
Vote on
Cloture ---> passes ----(move to "vote on the nominee")------->-+
| |
| |
rejected |
| |
| |
Frist raises V
point of order ---> chair alone implements point of order --->-+
to the Chair (the ultimate nuclear option) V
| |
| |
Chair passes |
point of order ---> to be decided without debate ---+ |
to the Senate | | |
| | | |
| V | |
| DEM Appeal DEM acquiesce |
| for Debate to vote on |
| | point of order |
| | without debate |
point of order GOP Motion | |
to be debated <-- fails-- to Table | |
by the Senate the DEM Appeal | |
| | | |
| passes | |
| | | |
point of order V V |
to be voted on <----------------+<----------------<-+ |
by Senate |
| |
| V
+--------------> passes --> vote on the nominee <------------+
The below summary is arranged with "+" signs indicating a point at which action can divide, such as taking a vote, or making a motion. Dashes, "-", indicate the possible outcomes from the decision point. The number of pluses or dashes indicates how deep the motions, points of order and votes are from a vote on the nominee and/or a vote on the use of the cloture process for nominees (two separate issues).
+ Take the cloture vote
- Cloture vote passes - DEMs have not triggered the nuclear option
Rule XXII provides 30 more hours of debate, then vote on Owen.
Cloture remains "entrenched" as an appropriate procedure for nominees.
The DEMs can withhold unanimous consent to vote on a future nominee.
- Cloture vote fails.
++ Frist asks a point of order of the chair
-- Chair presents the point of order to the Senate with the
stipulation that the point of order must be decided without debate
+++ DEM objects (an appeal to the chair) to the
stipulation that the point of order must be decided without debate
++++ GOP moves to table the appeal to the chair.
Motions to table are not debatable.
This is the likely first vote following the cloture vote
and is one place the nuclear option cold beging to unravel
---- The Senate rejects the motion to table the appeal
This would begin unraveling of the nuclear option
--- The DEM objection is sustained
-- The point of order is to be debated by the full Senate.
++!! Layers of points of order and appeal within a debate
on whether or not the point of order should pass.
This path would be "the rules quagmire" if the point of order calls for
changing the application of the cloture rule to nominees.
Debate, motions and votes would be governed by the Senate's peculiar
parliamentary procedure.
---- The Senate passes the motion to table the appeal
--- The Senate tables the DEM objection to deciding without debate
Frist's point of order will be decided by the Senate without debate.
++ The point of order is voted on by the Senate, without debate
-- The Senate rejects the point of order
This is outright rejection of the "nuclear option"
Ramifications depend on the language of the point of order
-- The Senate passes the point of order
+ Action follows the language of the point of order.
There may or may not be further debate on the nominee.
There will be a time set for a vote on at least the current nominee, Owen.
The point of order may or may not encompass more than the current nominee.
Nice flow chart, cboldt.
I can't wait to see it actually happen on the floor of the Senate. :o)
The flow chart has some boo-boos in it. If the vote on Own comes via passing the cloture motion, there will be no point of order, and the GOP won't get whatever was "in" it.
No need to give me a recap. Just read the Board about the compromise. It makes me sick, frankly.
Gee, what a surprise.
The MSM is declaring McCain the big winner in all this.
Who'd a thunk it?!
Timeout-
First, I hope you believe me when I tell you I was totally unaware of this compromise, until I posted to you, and started to read the Board- it wasn't like I was saying that I was right in being cynical. I'm not like that.
When I read about the compromise, I was livid. Frist has to call the vote anyway on every filibuster, and he has to get and up/down on each nominee. Maybe this is what the compromise actually says, but regardless, to make himself legitimate, he has to call the vote.
But I'm afraid this is precisely what the leaders were up to. Each side played to its base, while all the while knowing, that there was hoing to be a compromise. Disgusting.
I hope you're not too disappointed- I'm fit to be tied.
Are we having a thread today?
It is already getting juicy.
Frist moved to get to voting on the judges and Reid wants to work on other matters this week.
What a good compromise.
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.