Via the NYT: Filibuster Fight Nears Showdown
Beginning Monday, when both Republicans and Democrats will mark the four-year anniversary of President Bush’s initial round of nominations, the parties and their allies will follow a day-by-day schedule of demonstrations, legislative maneuvers and other public events in anticipation of an imminent floor showdown.
It is remarkable that this tale has been going on for four years now.
And, UGH:
“They understand that Republicans are changing the rules in the middle of the game,” said Senator Richard J. Durbin of Illinois, the No. 2 Democrat in the Senate. “They understand that Republicans are diminishing the power of the Senate and the constitutional system of checks and balances.”
On the former point, as I have argued, and with firm historical backing, the Democrats are changing the way the process works by this type of filibuster (not to mention that this type of rules change has been engaged in before for similar reasons when the Democrats were in charge). And to the latter point: no, they don’t understand that, as it is clear many people don’t understand checks and balances–certainly the Democratic leadership in the Senate seems not to understand it.
Really, there are only two options to explain this impasse: either Bush has nominated individuals who are truly radical (which is contradicted by the fact that all have had Senate confirmation before and most (all?) have been approved by the ABA) or the Democrats are making an unprecedented power play in this process.
I didn’t disagree with your basic premise until the last sentence - “or the Democrats are making an unprecedented power play in this process”
That’s the sort of hyperbole that’s begun to inundate politics, on both sides. The Democrat’s tactics are no more a power play than the Republicans’ refusal to give Clinton nominees a hearing. Each side works with the weapons at hand, and always have.
Comment by Harry — Sunday, May 8, 2024 @ 9:42 am
Well, to block en masse, this number of Appeals Court nominees is unprecedented by definition (it has never happened before). And, I would argue, it is a power play. How is that statement hypberole?
Comment by Steven Taylor — Sunday, May 8, 2024 @ 2:33 pm
Did Bush not make a powerplay by nominating the same group again, even after he said he would try and work with both sides?
The Republicans used their committees to keep Clinton’s appointments from going through.
As Tim Russert pointed out on “Meet the Press” this morning, many key judges that DeLay and company are complaining about have been appointed by Republicans, Bush seems to want only radical judges. I would say radical for either side is bad.
This is just a setup for Supreme Court appointments, I wouldn’t be surprised to see Bork put up again.
Comment by The Misanthrope — Sunday, May 8, 2024 @ 2:46 pm
I don’t see re-nominating these folks after an election to be a “power play” insofar as the Senate is still free to reject the nominees. Where’s the “power play”?
I agree, btw, with the ridiculous nature of the criticisms that many, Delay included, have leveled at the bench (and have blogged such).
Comment by Steven Taylor — Sunday, May 8, 2024 @ 3:06 pm
We know what the status quo has yielded. All those who like it should raise your hand (and leave it there).
Now it’s about to be history being made. Even this change of the rules falls within the rules, so let’s leave it to the historians to figure out if it’s good or bad.
Comment by Neo — Sunday, May 8, 2024 @ 6:30 pm
I see the powerplay as Bush, who is known to be very competitive, demanding to win for his nominees. If he were trying to mend fences, he would try to determine the most objectionable of those that are giving the Democrats heartburn.
Comment by The Misanthrope — Sunday, May 8, 2024 @ 9:48 pm
Clearly both sides are involved in a power play. But remember that the Republicans have forced the Democrats hand by eliminating the procedural ways that a nominee could be blocked in committee and insiting that all nominees get an up or down vote.
That, in and of itself, is a radical idea which has never been the case before. Ask any of the 60 plus Clinton nomineees who never got an up or down vote.
Comment by SoloD — Monday, May 9, 2024 @ 12:30 pm