That Wonderful Filibuster Compromise
Power Line points out a Washington Post article that buries the lede with a revelation that (while not unexpected) proves that the filibuster “deal” amounted to a Republican capitulation:
After that, Republican leaders are considering whether to try to force votes on one of the other four not covered by the deal, William G. Myers III of Idaho, to test Democratic resolve. Democrats said they believe they have a united caucus — excepting Sen. Ben Nelson (Neb.) — to block the other judges, meaning they would have enough votes to maintain a filibuster.
You read that right. Democrats are going to filibuster all four of the judges not covered by the deal. Even Kavanaugh.
Calling Lindsey Graham. Calling Mike DeWine. Are you going to stand for this?
My guess is: you will.
It’s going to take more than a single free bottle of wine to drown the sorrows I am going to feel when this “deal” provides cover for a successful filibuster of a highly qualified Supreme Court candidate.
Very bad reporting from the Washington Post. Myers is on the floor but will not be called up for vote in June nor July. Maybe DeWine and Graham are hoping that Judicial Watch’s lawsuit is successful.
Loren (f2f4d9) — 6/3/2005 @ 11:32 amIf the dems filibuster at all, the deal should be off and the filibuster nuked.
ttyler5 (77d0e0) — 6/3/2005 @ 12:56 pmPolitical fallout from being the ones to ‘break the deal’ wouldn’t be worth it. People will simply roll with it, because that’s what Republicans do.
I think we should push the issue – it’s fun to see how long a drunken senator can try to stay upright and understandable, at least for a Democrat.
Oh well, next time we have a Clinton-esque president we can filib… no, wait, they’d get us in a compromise and we’d actually keep it. F***!
blueeyes (85e0cf) — 6/3/2005 @ 1:35 pmHere is where things get interesting. Coalitions only hold up so long as a critical mass of members stand firm. Each coalition dropout makes it easier for the others to drop out as well.
DeWine, Warner, and Graham, are all weak links in this coalition. If one drops out, will the others want to be left holding the leaky bag of ….?
My guess is that they will not. McCain can say he gave it a good try, but when the Dems filibuster one of these nominees, we ought to see the nuke option implemented.
Paul Deignan (28376c) — 6/3/2005 @ 2:26 pmI hope you’re right, Paul. I’d rather lose this bet than win it. I’m not holding my breath, though.
Xrlq (5ffe06) — 6/3/2005 @ 2:46 pmI’m don’t like even thinking it, but as long as McCain stays silent and does nothing, Graham will too. There are no profiles in courage here. Graham and DeWine may finally realize they’ve been so easily had, but they’ve given no indication. These 7 Republicans have found how easy it is to continue avoiding fights once you’ve cut any deal with Democrats.
Mr. Right (95a177) — 6/3/2005 @ 4:59 pmLets say that Myers is filbustered. If DeWine and Graham do not vote for the nuclear option (should it be presented) then both will jeopardize their relection bids and reneg on their promises to vote for the nuke option except in “extraordinary” circumstances.
Both could face primary challenges, but the lack of base turnout would be what would certainly doom them in a general election. They know this very well now. That gives the GOP the necessary number of votes to nuke regardless of McCain’s position (who knows what that will be).
So, my guess is a Dem filibuster (they can’t help themselves) followed by a nuke. By joining the GOP in the nuke option both DeWine and Graham would come out as principled winners. Should McCain continue to hold out, he would seem like a very sore loser. In short, I would expect the entire arrangement to crumble should Myers be filibustered and frist push the issue (which he must).
Paul Deignan (048940) — 6/4/2005 @ 6:54 am