Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Republicans: We Will NOT Tolerate blocking Bush's Nominees, The End of Fillibusters?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Republicans: We Will NOT Tolerate blocking Bush's Nominees, The End of Fillibusters?

    SENATE LEADERSHIP
    Frist To Go 'Nuclear' On Nominations
    By John Stanton
    Senate Majority Leader Frist today is expected to give his blessing to a GOP plan to dramatically change the Senate's voting rules -- effectively eliminating Democrats' ability to filibuster President Bush's judicial nominees, aides said Tuesday.
    Democratic leadership sources warned that a move to reduce from 60 to 51 the number of votes needed to end a filibuster of judicial nominees would be considered a declaration of war by most Democrats, could further weaken the position of the chamber's shrinking population of moderates and almost certainly would create new obstacles for the GOP's agenda.
    During a closed-door meeting of the GOP Conference today, Frist will inform his colleagues that while the so-called "nuclear option" of changing Senate rules will be reserved as a last resort, Republicans will no longer tolerate Democratic efforts to block Bush's nominees to the federal bench, an aide to Frist confirmed.
    According to this source, no immediate action on changing the rules is planned. Frist will wait for the next floor debate on a contested Bush appointee.
    During that process, he will attempt to negotiate with Democrats and pursue any and all options to break the deadlock. Assuming those overtures fail, Frist would then ask the presiding officer of the Senate to rule on the 60-vote requirement.
    The presiding officer would then find that only a 51-vote majority is needed to end a filibuster in the case of judicial nominees -- a finding to which Democrats would almost certainly object, forcing a vote on whether to overturn the ruling of the chair.
    But because Frist would only need 51 votes from his new 55 vote-majority to protect the decision, the majority leader believes he would have enough support within his Conference to impose the change.
    Although Frist came to his decision in an effort to speed the approval process of Bush's nominees, Democratic sources warned pursuing a rule change would almost certainly poison the already bitter atmosphere in the Senate and undermine the efforts of moderates in both parties to reduce tensions in the chamber.
    A bipartisan group of moderate lawmakers Tuesday held the first post-election meeting of the "Centrist Coalition" headed up by Sens. Joseph Lieberman, D-Conn., and Olympia Snowe, R-Maine. The group announced that Sens. George Voinovich, R-Ohio, and Ben Nelson, D-Neb., will serve as co-chairmen.
    The group's aim, according to Snowe, is to "help break the impasse on issues" moderates in both parties can agree are important to the nation as a whole. Lieberman told reporters, "What drives us together is the feeling that Congress has become too partisan."
    But use of the nuclear option on judges could kill those efforts before they ever begin. One source close to Democratic moderates warned, "If Frist starts playing games like this, you're going to see more and more of us say, 'Well, [forget] him.'"
    A Democratic leadership source agreed, predicting a change to the rules might galvanize Senate Democrats of all stripes while emboldening progressive elements within the party to become more aggressive in their opposition to the GOP.
    "Can you imagine what a guy like [Sen. Tom] Harkin will do?" the leadership source asked of the populist Democrat from Iowa.
    The far-right Republicans continue to show their hatred of democracy and their love of one-party rule.
    http://monkspider.blogspot.com/

  • #2

    Comment


    • #3
      Well, can't the democrats fillibuser that proposal?
      If you don't like reality, change it! me
      "Oh no! I am bested!" Drake
      "it is dangerous to be right when the government is wrong" Voltaire
      "Patriotism is a pernecious, psychopathic form of idiocy" George Bernard Shaw

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by GePap
        Well, can't the democrats fillibuser that proposal?
        I hope so.

        Comment


        • #5
          What will Mr. Smith do now?
          "Flutie was better than Kelly, Elway, Esiason and Cunningham." - Ben Kenobi
          "I have nothing against Wilson, but he's nowhere near the same calibre of QB as Flutie. Flutie threw for 5k+ yards in the CFL." -Ben Kenobi

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Republicans: We Will NOT Tolerate blocking Bush's Nominees, The End of Fillibusters?

            Originally posted by monkspider


            The far-right Republicans continue to show their hatred of democracy and their love of one-party rule.
            Not to mention their love of their own hipocrasy. Who here remembers the Republicans filibustering Clinton many, many times?
            The cake is NOT a lie. It's so delicious and moist.

            The Weighted Companion Cube is cheating on you, that slut.

            Comment


            • #7
              So let me get this straight. Bush sends up 211 nominations and the Senate signs off on 201 of them but decides they don't like 10 out of 211 and Republicans are claiming that is a mass blocking? They need to stop listening to Rush Limbaugh and start doing some indendent thinking.

              BTW it would also help for them to reread the Constitution especially the part about how the President's judicial nominees are to be "selected with the advice and consent of the Senate".
              Try http://wordforge.net/index.php for discussion and debate.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by Albert Speer
                What will Mr. Smith do now?
                Word.

                Repugs
                http://monkspider.blogspot.com/

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by Albert Speer
                  What will Mr. Smith do now?
                  Go to Canada...
                  Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent. Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent. Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil? Is he neither able nor willing?
                  Then why call him God? - Epicurus

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    So wait, when the democrats throw every rule and technicality they can at preventing a vote, thats Democracy in action, but when the republicans force the senate to vote on nominees, thats totalitarian communism in action?

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Whoha: That appears to be the Republican position.
                      Try http://wordforge.net/index.php for discussion and debate.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        The far-right Republicans continue to show their hatred of democracy and their love of one-party rule.


                        How is being the majority party and trying to pass laws hatred of democracy?

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by Whoha
                          So wait, when the democrats throw every rule and technicality they can at preventing a vote, thats Democracy in action, but when the republicans force the senate to vote on nominees, thats totalitarian communism in action?
                          Fillibustering keeps the majority from steamrolling the minority and so forces comprimise.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            It does indeed, however, I don't give a rats ass about Gay Marriage and abortion, so the apointment of Bush's Nominees matters very little to me. Unless of course we can get some neat footage of people immolating themselves over it.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by Odin
                              Fillibustering keeps the majority from steamrolling the minority and so forces comprimise.


                              Filibustering is an abuse of parliamentary procedure to give the minority effective veto power over all legislation.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X