QUESTION: According to Kennedy, a slew of rules will be broken if the GOP

[smartvoter]

executes the nuclear option. If this is the case, how is what they do valid? I don't understand the inner workings of the Senate, but if what he says is correct, it seems that their actions would be invalid.

Anyone with applicable knowledge have some insight?



---------------------
Excerpt and link (scroll down about 3/4ths):

"Neither the Constitution, nor Senate Rules, nor Senate precedents, nor American history, provide any justification for the Majority Leader's attempt to selectively nullify the use of the filibuster to push through these radical nominees. Equally important, neither the Constitution nor the Rules nor the precedents nor history provide any permissible means for a bare majority of the Senate to take that radical step without breaking or ignoring clear provisions of applicable Senate Rules and unquestioned precedents. Here are some of the rules and precedents that the executive will have to ask its allies in the Senate to break or ignore, in order to turn the Senate into a rubber stamp for nominations:

http://kennedy.senate.gov/~kennedy/statements/05/05/2005518C55.html"

[minnesotaDFLer]

1. do you

honestly think breaking rules bothers these people?

[FreedomAngel82]

4. They already did that

in 2000.

[smartvoter]

5. Of course not. But doesn't it invalidate what they do? Or if not, why? nt

[wtmusic]

2. There is a questionable legal basis

it involves a senator raising a point of order at some point that further debate is "dilatory", the president sustaining it, and the Democrats being unable to overturn it by a simple majority.

The Democrats could always turn to the courts but the courts taking a case that involved another branch of the government would be very, very unlikely. Thus, because enforcement is 9/10 of the law--we have a new law.

[smartvoter]

7. This is what I heard, then watched Kennedy today and thought "WTF?" nt

[wtmusic]

10. Frist & Co. are saying they aren't changing any Senate Rules

and if that's the case they're off the hook for a good part of Kennedy's charges.

Paragraph 2 of Rule XXII is not so clear. They will in fact be "ending debate" which, to a reasonable person, would look like a rules violation.

The most important violation here IMO is that of trust and cooperation. The Republicans are in effect saying, "We're going to bypass 200 years of trust to screw you on this technicality, which has no review whatsoever." That doesn't just hurt Democrats; that hurts everybody. It means war, and don't think Kennedy, Harry Reid, Boxer, and others are just going to lie down for this one.

[smartvoter]

11. I agree with you. Just trying to understand the "binding" aspect. nt

[bpilgrim]

3. sounds like REVOLUTION

if our GOV is no longer following the constitution they are no longer legit and must be resisted, non-violently, of course, by any means NECESSARY!




peace

[chalky]

6. Help with that link, please.

Or let me know what to click on Kennedy's main page to get there.

Thanks.

[smartvoter]

8. Here is another try:

http://kennedy.senate.gov/~kennedy/statements/05/05/2005518C55.html

[TahitiNut]

9. Absolutely no Senate Rules can stop them.

Once virtually the entire majority party openly embraces brazen corruption and dishonesty, and their 'leadership' is willing to blithely discard a rule or law and knowingly LIE about the legitimacy of their act, literally nothing but violent revolution can stop them.

The only 'rule' they're following now is "might makes right."