Monday, February 14, 2005

Do two wrongs make a right?

From the WashTimes: “Frist has the necessary votes to change filibuster rules

Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist says he has the 51 votes needed to change Senate rules and make it easier for Republicans to overcome Democratic filibusters against President Bush's judicial nominees, but he hopes such a change won't be necessary.

"We need to restore the over 200-year tradition and precedent of allowing every nominee of the president who has majority support an up-or-down vote on the floor of the United States Senate," Mr. Frist told The Washington Times on Thursday.
I’m ambivalent over the issue of using the “nuclear option” to change long-standing Senate rules. On the one hand, I don’t like the idea of changing rules on the fly and this procedural maneuver will bring down a shower of criticism on the “imperial” Republican leadership. On the other hand, the Senate Democrats have invented from whole cloth a new definition of “advise and consent” – one that hasn’t existed in the Senate for two centuries. Ultimately, I would have to say my position on the matter is similar to Polipundit’s: “I think it’s better to let the Democrat filibusters continue, so that we can elect more and more Republican senators.”

1 comment:

Anonymous said...

"On the one hand, I don’t like the idea of changing rules on the fly and this procedural maneuver will bring down a shower of criticism on the “imperial” Republican leadership."

Uh maybe you should think about the fact that Robert Byrd used this exact procedure 4 times when he was majority leader. I don't think it's going to be an imperial leadership when Janice Rogers Brown gets 55 votes for confirmation. And no we won't elect any more Republicans -- the Dems will follow Ken Salazaar's example and make a promise to vote for cloture.