| |
|
Friday, May 13, 2005
|
|
Senate Judicial Filibuster Showdown Nears
The Senate showdown on judicial nominations draws ever closer. Majority Leader Bill Frist's office released the following statement today:
STATEMENT FROM THE OFFICE OF THE SENATE MAJORITY LEADER
Upon completion of action on the pending highway bill, the Senate will begin debate on fair up or down votes on judicial nominations. As is the regular order, the Leader will move to act on judge nominations sent to the full Senate by the Judiciary Committee in the past several weeks. Priscilla Owen, to serve as a judge for the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals, and Janice Rogers Brown, to serve as a judge for the DC Circuit Court of Appeals, will be the nominees of focus.
The Majority Leader will continue to discuss an appropriate resolution of the need for fair up or down votes with the Minority Leader. If they can not find a way for the Senate to decide on fair up or down votes on judicial nominations, the Majority Leader will seek a ruling from the Presiding Officer regarding the appropriate length of time for debate on such nominees. After the ruling, he will ensure that every Senator has the opportunity to decide whether to restore the 214-year practice of fair up or down votes on judicial nominees; or, to enshrine a new veto by filibuster that both denies all Senators the opportunity to advise and consent and fundamentally disturbs the separation of powers between the branches.
There will be a full and vigorous Senate floor debate that is too important for parliamentary tactics to speed it up or slow it down until all members who wish have had their say. All members are encouraged to ensure that rhetoric in this debate follows the rules, and best traditions, of the Senate.
It is time for 100 Senators to decide the issue of fair up or down votes for judicial nominees after over two years of unprecedented obstructionism. The Minority has made public threats that much of the Senate's work will be shut down. Such threats are unfortunate.
The Majority Leader has proposed his Fairness Rule: up to 100 hours of debate, and then an up or down vote on circuit and Supreme Court nominations. Further, the Fairness Rule would eliminate the opportunity for blockade of such nominees at the Judiciary Committee. And finally, it will make no changes to the legislative filibuster.
If Senators believe a nominee is qualified, they should have the opportunity to vote for her. If they believe she is unqualified, they should have the opportunity to vote against her.
Members must decide if their legacy to the Senate is to eliminate the filibuster's barrier to the Constitutional responsibility of all Senators to advise and consent with fair, up or down votes.
-30-
9:45:29 PM 
|
|
Filibusters: A History
Blog readers might find this document, being distributed today by the Senate Republican Conference , of interest:
Dates Democrats Want to Forget
1787
The year the U.S. Constitution was ratified without the filibuster as part of it
1789
The year the Senate was originally constituted with rules that permitted a majority vote to end debate
1806
The year that the filibuster became theoretically possible through an inadvertent rules change
1837
The year that a filibuster was used for the first time to block legislation
1917
The year that a "cloture" rule was adopted to control legislative filibusters
1949
The year that the Senate rules were changed to extend cloture to all debatable matters, including nominations
1968
The first time a bipartisan filibuster was used to deny a judicial nominee an up-or-down vote. But the nominee, Abe Fortas to be Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, did not have majority support, and was opposed by one-third of his own party. He withdrew his nomination shortly after the failed cloture vote. In contrast, every one of the filibustered judicial nominees in 2003 and 2004 had majority support.
1977, 1979, 1980, 1987
The years in which then Senate Majority-Leader Robert Byrd employed the constitutional option in order to limit minority and individual Senators' rights
2003, 2004
The years in which partisan filibusters were used for the first time to deny confirmation to a judicial nominee with majority support. Ten nominees were blocked from getting up-or-down votes due to the filibuster
2005
The year the Senate will restore the 214-year tradition of up-or-down votes on every judicial nominee with majority support Thanks to Barbara Ledeen of the SRC for sharing it.
9:44:39 PM
|
|
|
© Copyright 2005 Ross Calloway.
Last update: 11/27/2005; 8:40:25 PM.
|
|
|
