Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

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 -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Bridge Player who wrote (2645)	6/25/2003 12:45:31 AM
From: LindyBill	Respond to of 794124

GOP Votes To Break Nominee Filibusters Democrats Appear Able to Block Plan By Helen Dewar Washington Post Staff Writer Wednesday, June 25, 2003; Page A21 You wonder why they go to the effort if they are doomed to fail. With Democrats conspicuously absent, a Senate committee's Republican majority approved a GOP leadership proposal yesterday to curb filibusters aimed at blocking President Bush's judicial nominations. But the proposal faces formidable obstacles in the Senate, where Democrats, with the likely support of some Republicans, appear to have enough votes to keep it from taking effect. Proposed last month by Majority Leader Bill Frist (R-Tenn.) and approved yesterday, 10 to 0, by the Rules and Administration Committee, the measure would prevent senators from indefinitely delaying a vote on any presidential nomination. It normally takes 60 votes in the 100-member Senate to stop a filibuster and bring a nomination to a vote. Under Frist's proposal, the number would decline in successive roll calls: from 60 to 57, then 54 and eventually to a simple majority of 51. The process could take as little as two weeks. Frist's move was prompted by fury among Republican colleagues over Democrats' filibusters to prevent confirmation votes on the federal appeals court nominations of Miguel Estrada and Priscilla R. Owen and threats of filibusters against at least two others. His proposal gathered steam as speculation increased that one or more Supreme Court justices might retire at the end of the court's term this month, opening the way for Bush to fill his first vacancy on the high court. Democrats denied they organized a boycott of the rules committee meeting yesterday, but they apparently felt little pressure to attend in light of the virtually certain party-line vote. They have signaled plans to do all in their power to stop the proposal on the floor, including use of a filibuster. Because of a compromise struck when the Senate last changed its filibuster rules in the 1970s, it takes a two-thirds majority -- or 67 votes -- to break a filibuster against a proposed rules change. Republicans have a 51 to 49 majority in the Senate, meaning they need 16 Democratic votes to prevail, even if they suffered no defections. There are rarely used procedures under which a rules change can be forced by a simple majority vote, but they are dubbed the "nuclear option" because of their likely effect on the Senate's fragile comity. A number of Republicans oppose such a course. Frist has neither ruled it out nor shown enthusiasm for it. Frist and his allies say the filibuster was never intended to block judicial nominations, but many of his colleagues are reluctant to tamper with the filibuster rule in any way. Much as outsiders criticize the Senate's tradition of unlimited debate as archaic, anti-democratic and maybe even unconstitutional, many senators cherish it as an instrument of their individual power and a vital part of the checks and balances at the heart of the American system of government. Frist did not say when he might bring the proposed rules change to the floor but vowed to keep pressing for its adoption. He said filibusters are so inherently unfair to other senators, as well as to the president and his nominees, that "we must continue to use all avenues to reverse this inexcusable precedent that the Democrats are trying to set." Sen. Charles E. Schumer (D-N.Y.), a member of the Rules and Judiciary committees, said the Republicans were overreacting. He noted that the Senate has confirmed 134 of Bush's judicial nominees, while blocking two. "It reminds me of a spoiled child throwing a temper tantrum," Schumer said in a written statement. As for the nuclear option, he said, it would "vaporize every bridge in sight -- bipartisan or otherwise." washingtonpost.com