White House, and Not Sen. Frist,
Could Prevent Deal on Filibuster
By JEANNE CUMMINGS
Staff Reporter of THE WALL STREET JOURNAL
April 27, 2005; Page B2
Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist is searching for a compromise that would avoid a showdown with Democrats over judicial nominations, but the White House's desire to avoid a filibuster on any future U.S. Supreme Court nominee could scuttle any deal.
Mr. Frist yesterday made it clear that no deal is imminent, despite recent comments by Democrats that they might be willing to remove their objections to some judges. "My goal is to have fair up and down votes [on all judicial nominees]. Are we going to shift from that principle? The answer to that is no," the Tennessee Republican said.
Republicans are considering changing the Senate rules to ban filibusters on judicial nominees, but some are balking at taking such a dramatic step, and that's putting pressure on Mr. Frist to find another way out of the dilemma. Democrats are offering to allow votes on four of the seven contested judges in exchange for more power to challenge nominees at the committee level and a promise that Republicans will abandon the rule change.
But that means a minority could still filibuster a future Supreme Court nominee -- and that's a deal breaker for most Republicans and for the White House.
The immediate issue concerns seven of President Bush's judicial nominations to appellate courts facing filibusters by Democrats, who claim they are too extreme to serve on the courts. Republicans argue they are being opposed because they are conservatives. The fight is widely viewed as a prelude to a Supreme Court nomination battle.
Vice President Dick Cheney, in a recent speech to Republican lawyers, signaled the White House's objection. "A filibuster of judicial nominees is, as a practical matter, an attempt to limit a president's ability to appoint judges who have majority support in the U.S. Senate," he said. Yesterday, Dan Bartlett, a counselor to the president, said, "We believe that judges should get an up or down vote. That simple."
"That will not happen," countered Senate Democratic leader Harry Reid of Nevada during remarks on the Senate floor. Recalling his days as a trial lawyer, he said that "the best settlement was when both parties walked out saying I'm unhappy. We can't make both sides happy with this. We are going to have to compromise. We are going to have to be statesmen."
With a showdown looming over the rule change -- nicknamed the "nuclear option" -- advocates are becoming more vocal. Former Vice President Al Gore today is scheduled to address one of more than 170 rallies organized by MoveOn.org, a liberal group that opposes President Bush's nominees, and a coalition of civil-rights groups will be escorting voters from Maine, Nebraska and other states to lobby senators to oppose any deal that hobbles the Democratic minority's ability to block the nominees. |
