WP'S Broder:Senate Democrats Should Make a Deal

[ibid]

Senate Democrats Should Make a Deal
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/05/06/AR2005050601350.html?sub=AR

<snip>Frist not unexpectedly rejected Reid's offer, saying that Bush believes all his judges deserve an up-or-down vote. Frist, in turn, outlined his own proposal, which was a bit more complex. In return for the Democrats' accepting a ban on judicial filibusters, Frist offered to guarantee up to 100 hours of floor debate on each court appointee. Acknowledging that Republicans had blocked several of Bill Clinton's choices for the bench by refusing them hearings or approval in the Judiciary Committee, Frist also said he would pledge that all future nominees would get to the full Senate for an up-or-down vote.<snip>

But Frist's suggestion offers a way to test that confidence. Democrats should accept the Frist proposal for the seven disputed judgeships and see what happens when they are examined carefully in extended debate on their individual merits. Democrats should not commit now to abandoning their right to filibuster a future Supreme Court nominee. Frist should concede on that point.

There is no Supreme Court vacancy at the moment and hence no pressing need to set or change the ground rules for considering such a nomination. The possibility of a filibuster could help steer Bush away from a highly controversial or ideological choice. Meanwhile, the pending appellate court judgeships could serve as test cases for the Senate's ability to look beyond partisanship and weigh these jurists on their merits.

If everyone voted on party lines on every one of the seven appointees, then there might be no escape from the destructive potential of the "nuclear option." But I think the Senate is better than that, and I think that senators deserve a chance to demonstrate that they can meet their constitutional duty to share with the president the task of staffing the third branch of government.<snip>

.
============================================
From the ABCNote:"The potential deal, spearheaded by Sens. Trent Lott (R-Miss.) and Ben Nelson (D-Neb.), would involve at least a half-dozen Senators from each party signing a letter or memorandum of understanding that signals how they would proceed to vote on all matters related to judicial nominations."

"The six Senate Republicans would commit to opposing the so-called nuclear option to end judicial filibusters, which would leave GOP leaders short of the 50 votes they need to execute the parliamentary move to abolish the procedure."

"In exchange, the six Senate Democrats would pledge to allow votes on four of the seven circuit court nominees who were already filibustered in the 108th Congress and have been renominated."

"Perhaps more importantly, the six Democrats would pledge to vote for cloture to end filibuster attempts on all other judicial nominees named by President Bush, including Supreme Court picks, except in 'extreme circumstances' according to a senior aide familiar with the discussions."

[w4rma]

1. I can't stand these out of touch beltway pundits. (nt)

[cybildisobedience]

7. Here's the analogy the Dems should be using

to explain why they can't negotiate with these GOP representatives:

If someone says to you, "Look, I want to rape your wife and all your children and then kill them in front of you," you don't come back with, "Well, let's make a deal -- you only kill one, but I get to pick which one..."

These people are crazy, greedy and immoral, and they are making an outrageous demand to reconstruct the Constitution!!! You do not meet them halfway, or even one inch of the way.
Stand firm, and channel your energies into making the American public see how out-of-control these people are.
When you even give an inch, you're implying that there was at least a degree of validity to their argument, which we know is baseless.

[rox63]

2. Broder is an a**hole

The Dems can't back down on this, nor should they.

[MessiahRp]

3. I agree totally...

Fuck this. We are winning this debate in the eyes of the public handily. Giving in continues to allow them to portray us as spineless. We may be the minority but we have those assholes cornered now. We have them on filibusters, we had them on Terri Shiavo and we have them on Social Security...

We have to win, not compromise, on these debates to let the public know that in 2006 the party that has the balls to stand up to Bush is our much tougher Democratic party.

Nobody held Bush's feet to the fire this whole time and now that we're doing it backing off is the last thing we need to do.

Rp

[Melodybe]

4. I fucking hate the Washington Post!!!!!

Fucking Bull shit appologists!

ARRG!!!!
Call your Senators 1 202 224 3121

[newfaceinhell]

5. Lott and Ben Nelson

How could any progressive reject a deal cooked up by these two??:sarcasm:

[Selatius]

6. There's already enough Dems who vote with the corporatists

This is just another attempt to further chip away the party, into nothingness.