Is there a "deal" in the works over the filibuster and judges ?

[kentuck]

It was mentioned on C-SPAN this AM and reported from the magazine, The Hill. Reportedly, it is a deal that Trent Lott and Ben Nelson are trying to work out. Supposedly, the Democrats would permit up to four of the judge nominations to go thru in exchange for "something". Anybody know more about this??

[ibid]

1. The Dem compromise was rejected by the GOP

The Reid compromise to Frist had meaningful say in picking judicial nominees who would serve in their home states - the old rule that the GOP recently threw out would be restored - but Lott emphatically rejected the idea of giving Democrats some say in picking Bush’s judicial nominees, saying “Hey, man, we had an election. Did they miss it? Their man lost, Bush won, and we’re not going to start letting pools (of nominees) be presented from which the Senate will choose. No, under the Constitution the president makes that recommendation, he alone.”

And Reid insists on keeping filibuster as Democrats would still want the filibuster to block a Bush Supreme Court nomination.

Way back on 4/13 the National Review floated a Ben Nelson story that said controversial judicial nominees get a vote after an allotted time for debate - and claimed that any "shutdown" would not be effective because not enough Democrats would not go along, quoting South Dakota Senator Tim Johnson "Clearly I don’t want to see complete gridlock in the Senate."


But I have not seen anything new.

[peacetalksforall]

2. I think the statistics from the Clinton Admin say it all...no Dem needs

to back down. You can't keep giving in to tyrannical, unrealistic, manipulative children.

[Al-CIAda]

3. Is there a "deal" in the works over the filibuster and judges ?"

If there is, which I do not doubt, then it is only further confirmation (if you need any that there is NO opposition.

[ibid]

5. ABCNote suggests a potential Deal is coming from Nelson/Lott and 10 others

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."

[kentuck]

6. Yep.. That's it !

What do you think?

[ibid]

7. I THINK IT SUCKS - gives the GOP a "win" for no good reason

makes Nelson the type of Dem that is not needed in the party -IMHO.

Better is to lose the fillibuster so that when we control we can do a quick 100% reversal.

[Al-CIAda]

8. Of course it sucks, and of course our reps SUCK. n/t

[cestpaspossible]

4. That's the deal Frist rejected.

What what a time warp, Lott USED to be Majority Leader, and that deal USED to be news.

[Idioteque]

9. According to CNN, Trent Lott said that there is NO DEAL n/t