June 11, 2005
THEY LOOK LIKE LINE DRIVES IN THE BOX SCORE:
Winning Ugly: Republicans are doing better than you think. (Fred Barnes, 06/20/2005, Weekly Standard)
WHO'S WINNING IN WASHINGTON RIGHT now? Republicans, President Bush included. But they are winning ugly, and just barely. Actually, if success on Social Security reform is the yardstick, Republicans aren't winning at all. What changes the score is success on judges. Thanks to the Gang of 14 deal to save the filibuster, a parade of relatively young and attractive conservatives are now being confirmed for the federal appeals courts, putting them in position to be nominated later for vacancies on the Supreme Court.When the agreement on judicial nominations was struck in May by seven Republican and seven Democratic senators, many conservatives agreed with Senate Democratic leader Harry Reid that it was a victory for Democrats. They were wrong. Since the agreement, the three prime targets of Democrats--Priscilla Owen, Janice Rogers Brown, William Pryor--have all been confirmed, plus two other less controversial nominees. And more conservatives are in the confirmation pipeline. So while Bush's chances of creating personal investment accounts have faded, his goal of shifting the ideological tilt of the federal judiciary is closer at hand.
Considerable credit goes to Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist. Without his pressure to enact the so-called nuclear option barring filibusters of judicial nominees, the deal leading to the string of confirmations would not have occurred. Also, the showdown over filibustering helped place the very idea of filibustering judges in an unfavorable light. This is especially significant with the likelihood of a Supreme Court vacancy (or two) this summer. Another result was to declare, as the Gang of 14 senators did, that the filibuster may be used to block a judicial nominee only in "extraordinary circumstances."
Who decides when these circumstances occur? The answer is Republicans.
The surest indication that the GOP had won the filibuster fight was conservative hysteria over the deal. Posted by Orrin Judd at June 11, 2005 2:08 PM
As long as Howard Dean continues to do his Marv Throneberry impression, the GOP will continue to have success. What really is important is that the GOP will do the nearly unthinkable and that is to gain significant amounts of seats in both houses in the mid-second term election of a President of their own party.
Posted by: bart at June 11, 2005 2:23 PMSensenbrenner gaveled the house judiciary meeting adjourned and all the Republicans walked out letting the Democrats rant and rave to their hearts' content.
That's what we need in the senate. Stop pretending Democrats are concerned about issues when it's clear they only want to perform for the cameras.
Posted by: erp at June 11, 2005 2:28 PMThree confirmations are nice. But if the Seven Dwarfs had voted with their suposed party, there'd be a rules change AND no need to chuck two good nominees overboard. The Democrats will filibuster any non-living-Constitution nominee to the Supreme Court anyway, and trot out their whining about "extremism" again. This fight could have been fought and won already but for the neo-Munich crowd in the GOP. Now it's just deferred closer to the mid-term elections. Brilliant. The surest sign "moderate" Republicans are delusional is when they tell you they've won something.
Posted by: Axel Kassel at June 11, 2005 2:54 PMThe beltway pundits are all calling SS reform dead. I think they are going to be caught completely off guard when the House and Senate unveil what they are working on behind closed doors later this year and put SS reform at the top of the agenda.
Posted by: AWW at June 11, 2005 2:56 PMAxel:
There weren't 50 votes for the rule change or they'd have done it when they reorganized the Senate and voted on the rules to start the session.
Posted by: oj at June 11, 2005 3:03 PMOJ:
It can't be too sure of a thing or else why did the Democrats bother to compromise?
I hope you're wrong just so we can throw the fear of God into them if they cross us again.
Posted by: Matt Murphy at June 11, 2005 5:13 PMSome of the really unreconstructed wingnuts are still crying about the deal. But as right-wing judge after right-wing judge walks into a lifetime gig, the left loonies are taking over the whine patrol.
Posted by: Casey Abell at June 11, 2005 6:42 PMRe OJ's comment, "There weren't 50 votes for the rule change..."
Precisely my point. There should have been 55, but for the fantasists who think handing Harry Reid a butterscotch drop and cooing about "bipartisanship" is worth giving up on the fight to secure judges who are more concerned with the text and intent of the Constitution than they are with auras, penumbras, juridical evolution, and the opinions of Belgian bureaucrats. Some people need to be defeated in future GOP primaries.
Posted by: Axel Kassel at June 11, 2005 6:56 PMAxel:
Maybe you can knock off enough so Democrats control the chamber.
Posted by: oj at June 11, 2005 7:01 PMWe got paid up front, which was nice, but now it is time for the Dems to filibuster some nominee and the gang of 14 has already agreed to let them.
Posted by: David Cohen at June 11, 2005 7:39 PMIn "extraordinary circumstances".
Posted by: oj at June 11, 2005 9:33 PMWhich each Senator must be allowed to judge for himself.
Posted by: David Cohen at June 11, 2005 11:40 PMexactly.
Posted by: oj at June 12, 2005 12:11 AMWhich means that there will definately be a filibuster, as Dem politics demands it. If I were advising the president, I would suggest that now would be a good time to send up some filibuster bait.
Posted by: David Cohen at June 12, 2005 12:07 PMand definitely a vote to end it
Posted by: oj at June 12, 2005 12:12 PMNo, that was the Dem's price. The seven Reps have agreed not to vote for the nuclear option even in the face of a filibuster.
Posted by: David Cohen at June 12, 2005 3:28 PMProvided each of them agrees the filibustered nominee is an "extraordinary circumstance".
Posted by: oj at June 12, 2005 3:56 PMIt will take a lot for a Democratic Senator to be able to go back to Lousiana, Arkansas, Nebraska, Colorado, the Dakotas and Florida to explain how a filibuster against any of Bush's presumptive nominees was an 'extraordinary circumstance.' If the behavior of a Johnston or a Landrieu, a Prior or a Salazar apppears to be knee-jerk, it will result in a GOP takeover.
Posted by: bart at June 12, 2005 4:35 PMBart: A GOP takeover? The Dems are worried about sticking at 44.
OJ: No, that's why that language is in there about the decision to filibuster being each Senator's personal decision and why the agreement to vote against the nuclear option wasn't contingent. The Dems have to get at least one new filibuster out of this. Do you really think that one additional filibuster will turn 5 of the 7?
Posted by: David Cohen at June 12, 2005 4:49 PMDavid:
Saad sounds like he should be filibustered. But as you say, it'll be one at a time instead of blanket filibusters.
Posted by: oj at June 12, 2005 5:50 PM