Liberals & the Filibuster
Now, the Washington Post is reporting, liberals are grousing about the filibuster deal.
"Our problem with the compromise is the price that was paid," notes DC Delegate Eleanor Holmes Norton (no stranger to complaining, she).
If one thinks about this carefuly, though, it makes no sense. The predominant understanding at the time that the Gang of 14 forged their compromise was that the Republicans had the 51 votes necessary to exercise the constitutional option.
If the compromise hadn't been struck, that would have happened. Republicans would have gotten their way, and the rules on the filibuster of judicial nominees would have been changed. Democrats would have lost the power to block any nominees (whereas here, they have successfully, it seems, stopped at least Saad and Myers, and there may be other agreements we don't know about)-- and they would have lost the filibuster for a future Supreme Court fight.
You'll rarely hear any defense of Senate Democrats here, but the 7 moderate Dems who forged this deal did a pretty good job -- they preserved the filibuster and blocked nominees who would presumably have gone through in the wake of the constitutional option being exercised.
On the other hand, the Republican dealmakers snatched victory from the jaws of defeat, and settled for half a glass when they could have had the whole thing.
But don't expect that rational thinking will stop Eleanor Holmes Norton, who's outraged at the elevation of Judge Janice Rogers Brown to the DC Circuit. Keep this in mind, the next time she claims to be an advocate for African American women!
"Our problem with the compromise is the price that was paid," notes DC Delegate Eleanor Holmes Norton (no stranger to complaining, she).
If one thinks about this carefuly, though, it makes no sense. The predominant understanding at the time that the Gang of 14 forged their compromise was that the Republicans had the 51 votes necessary to exercise the constitutional option.
If the compromise hadn't been struck, that would have happened. Republicans would have gotten their way, and the rules on the filibuster of judicial nominees would have been changed. Democrats would have lost the power to block any nominees (whereas here, they have successfully, it seems, stopped at least Saad and Myers, and there may be other agreements we don't know about)-- and they would have lost the filibuster for a future Supreme Court fight.
You'll rarely hear any defense of Senate Democrats here, but the 7 moderate Dems who forged this deal did a pretty good job -- they preserved the filibuster and blocked nominees who would presumably have gone through in the wake of the constitutional option being exercised.
On the other hand, the Republican dealmakers snatched victory from the jaws of defeat, and settled for half a glass when they could have had the whole thing.
But don't expect that rational thinking will stop Eleanor Holmes Norton, who's outraged at the elevation of Judge Janice Rogers Brown to the DC Circuit. Keep this in mind, the next time she claims to be an advocate for African American women!
posted by LadybugUSA at 12:59 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home