Nucular Winter
Consider the gauntlet thrown down last week by Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist at the Federalist Society's annual conference.
Speaking of Democrats' unprecedented filibuster of 10 appeals-court nominees, Sen. Frist announced his intention to go "nuclear" if they try the same tactic again. Under the "nuclear option," Senate rules would be reinterpreted so that 51 votes, not a supermajority of 60, would be needed to end debate on judicial nominees and move to an up-or-down vote on the floor. The Constitution requires a majority of senators to confirm a president's selection and all of the nominees filibustered in Mr. Bush's first term would have been confirmed by bipartisan majorities if the Senate had been permitted to hold a vote.
Full Article
The Republican party already control the three branches of government, albeit narrowly. In keeping with their tradition of unremitting tenacity, they won't be satisfied until they have complete leeway to implement a far reaching, far right agenda. One of the principal strategies to get there involves packing the courts with reactionary neanderthals. Thus, to the true believers, the Constitution, American public opinion, and Senate traditions are but minor obstacles.
Read On!
 |
 |
|---|---|
| The Democratic filibusters are "unprecedented," and "the Constitution requires a majority of senators to confirm a president's selection." |
Pure poppycock--we've covered this elsewhere this week. The fact is that Bush has had it easy, with only 3.4% of the most radical, reactionary nominees blocked--compared to the Republicans blocking 20% of nominees in Clinton's last five years. The Constitution does not say anything about a simple majority--only that the Senate give their advice and consent. And for almost 200 years this has included the filibuster, a crucial stumbling block to reactionary power grabs. |
| "When it comes time to consider a filibuster--especially for a high-profile Supreme Court nomination--red-state Democrats are likely to recall the fate of their colleague Tom Daschle and demur. The senator from South Dakota lost his seat this month in part over his obstruction of the president's judicial nominations." |
Democrats might also recall something most Republican senators forgot a long time ago--their dignity. They were elected to represent, not to roll over. And they would do well do remember Daschle--no matter how soft your teeth are, the Republicans will viciously attack anybody who doesn't tow their line. |
| Roe v. Wade is contrary to the will of the people: "If nominated, all would be attacked from the left for the usual Roe reasons..." | According to a Nov. 7 poll, 61% of Americans want Bush to appoint judges who will uphold Roe v. Wade. This number has been stable for over 25 years. |
The Republican party already control the three branches of government, albeit narrowly. In keeping with their tradition of unremitting tenacity, they won't be satisfied until they have complete leeway to implement a far reaching, far right agenda. One of the principal strategies to get there involves packing the courts with reactionary neanderthals. Thus, to the true believers, the Constitution, American public opinion, and Senate traditions are but minor obstacles.
Only a tiny handful of wingers have been kept off the bench, thanks to a record of Republican yesmanship any Senate Majority Leader ought to be proud of. But that's not enough--if absolute obedience is not granted, Mr. Frist has threatened to "go nucular"--to change the rules and bypass the long tradition of negotiation in the Senate in favor of complete subservience to the administration.
What's the harm in a few wackos on the backbench? After Rehnquist was hospitalized, the sharks of the right smell blood in the water, and they want only the most diabolically reactionary jurists to take the place of Rehnquist and two or three other ancient justices. People like Charles Pickering and Priscilla Owen, who think civil rights are for states, not people, who want to demolish any regulation of industry for safety or the environment, and who, to a person, can be depended on to toss away a woman's right to control her body.
Hmm, doesn't sound like the cuddly Bush from the campaign, does it? If this radical administration and its jackbooted senate fan club decide to "go nucular," there will be fallout.
