January 17, 2006


Democrats abort deal on Alito vote (Charles Hurt, January 17, 2006, THE WASHINGTON TIMES)

Senate Democrats have scrapped a "good-faith" agreement they made two months ago to allow the Judiciary Committee to vote today on the Supreme Court nomination of Judge Samuel A. Alito Jr.

"This is a new low in our confirmation process," said Sen. John Cornyn, Texas Republican. "Not only because it is virtually unprecedented, but also because it reflects a breach of trust."

Posted by Orrin Judd at January 17, 2006 12:03 PM

The GOP should know better than to expect the party of Pat Leahy and Ted Kennedy to keep any "good faith" agreements at all.

Posted by: Matt Murphy at January 17, 2006 12:09 PM

Great headline on the article, though...

Posted by: Jorge Curioso at January 17, 2006 12:14 PM

Is this a sign the gang of 14 deal might be tested in the full Senate? and whether the nuclear option will be used?

Posted by: AWW at January 17, 2006 12:47 PM

Fine! Pull the pin, fling the spoon and lob that thing in there -- this should be GREAT.

Posted by: John Resnick at January 17, 2006 1:05 PM

In a way this is like those henchmen for the evil supervillians in the James Bond movies who failed on their first try to eliminate 007. They're being called out as wimps by their core constituancy because they failed to stop Alito in the hearings and are trying to find any way to be given a second chance and not be dropped through the trap door into the shark tank (OK, maybe not Teddy, since he would get stuck in the trap door, but the rest of them are trying to reaffirm their worth to the MoveOn/Kos/DU crowd in whatever way possible).

Posted by: John at January 17, 2006 1:13 PM

I read some analyst saying that another reason for the delay is so that they can use the money they raised for judicial nominations in attack ads against Lincoln Chaffee, Rick Santorum, and Mike DeWine -- three Senators thought to be vulnerable in their 2006 re-election campaigns. Once Alito is confirmed, the issue goes away and they can't use money raised for judicial nominations to influence Senate races.

Either way, their behavior is clearly partisan and their word, when given to Republicans, is untrustworthy. This has to help party unity in the Senate.

Posted by: pj at January 17, 2006 1:54 PM