Politics for Pros- moderated Message Board

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Politics for Pros- moderated

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: KLP who wrote (108899)	4/13/2005 10:48:37 AM
From: JohnM	Read Replies (1) of 793877

John...Why is it that the previous Administration had a 51 vote majority, and yet this one is expected to have a supermajority of 60+??????? How is that deemed to be "fair" or "right" or anything else but supremely political? Karen, I don't quite understand your point. Could you be more specific? If your focus is on approval of judicial appointments, those rules haven't changed. At least not yet. The Republicans could have used filibuster rules to stop judicial appointments under Clinton when they were in the minority. Some of the time, however, they had a Senate majority and stopped a lot more Clinton appointees in committee than the Dems have since Bush was elected. I forget the numbers but the ratio is something like 4 to 1. There is a strong argument, not certain I agree with it, that these filibuster rules make extremist appointments ("extremist" is very much in the eye of the beholder) less likely. The stories go that Clinton worked very carefully with Oren Hatch on Supreme Court appointments to find middle of the road types. Bush has refused to do that with the Dems. But perhaps you had something else in mind.

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next