206 Confirmed. 10 Filibustered. (95.4% Approved) - Did you know that?

[DesEtoiles]

I was shocked when I read that today. All this hullaballo, when 95.4% of Bush's judicial nominees have already been approved without contest? I think the public needs to understand this statistic.

[GetTheRightVote]

1. Yes, I knew of this number, it is sad how they put a lie to it all

Repubs are so dishonest it is at times amazing anyone believes them at all.

:kick:

[DesEtoiles]

2. here are links

With a great deal of information on each of the contested nominees. It will make you sick how sick and twisted these people are, and how the American people pretty much know nothing about it. They just think Dems are engaging in a partisan pissing contest. Believe me that is not the case.

http://www.pfaw.org/pfaw/general/default.aspx?oid=14172

http://www.independentjudiciary.org/

[KaliTracy]

3. compared to how many Clinton appointed judges -vs filibustered? Is that

data around?

[tritsofme]

6. Since the Republicans were the majority in the Senate for most of

Clinton's term, they could reject many Clinton nominees in committee without allowing a floor vote, or the need for a filibuster.

[KaliTracy]

7. yeah and they could also "shut down" the government .... how many nominees

were rejected -- I tend to remember it being a lot.... (i can research this furth tomorrow if you don't know off-hand...)

[ProgressiveConn]

4. "The Taliban Ten" nt

[shraby]

5. Several of his appointments were

"recess" appointments when congress was not in session.

[Blue Topaz]

8. Yes, the Republican whining is disgusting

In their first 4 years:

Reagan had 88% of his nominees confirmed
G HW Bush had 77% confirmed
Clinton had 81% confirmed (but that includes years when Dems controlled Congress. If you look at the Repub controlled years, his confirmation rate goes down to about 70%).

Another way to look at it: Dems have blocked 10 of Bush's nominees, while Repubs blocked 63 of Clinton's, mostly by not letting them out of committee.

Ready to be even more disgusted? Check out how the Repubs have changed the rules of the game since gaining control and getting their boy in office:

"Originally, after Republicans gained control of the Senate in the 1994 elections and Utah Sen. Orrin Hatch assumed control of the Judiciary Committee, the rule regarding judicial nominees was this: If a single senator from a nominee's home state objected to (or "blue-slipped") a nomination, it was dead. This rule made it easy for Republicans to obstruct Clinton's nominees.

But in 2001, when a Republican became president, Hatch suddenly reversed course and decided that it should take objections from both home-state senators to block a nominee. That made it harder for Democrats to obstruct George W. Bush's nominees.

In early 2003 Hatch went even further: Senatorial objections were merely advisory, he said. Even if both senators objected to a nomination, it could still go to the floor for a vote."

A few weeks after this rule change, Hatch ended "Rule IV". This required at least one member of the minority to agree to end discussion about a nomination and move it out of committee.

I only recently found all this out, so you can bet that the great masses know nothing about the slimy game Repubs are playing. What a pathetic bunch of hypocrites these guys are. They made full use of all their options when they were the minority party, promptly stole every option from Dems but the filibuster, and then foam in outrage when the Dems use it.

Payback is going to be one tough mother when the Repubs find themselves the minority once again.

[cry baby]

9. good info, and welcome to DU!

:hi:

[Old and In the Way]

10. Welcome onboard!

You obviously will fit right in here....great post!

[Blue Topaz]

11. Thanks! nt

[KaliTracy]

12. thanks for this info -- it helps put things in context when speaking to

others about this issue.