ConfirmThem

Given the time frame of the upcoming lame duck session (7-10 days), only one of the six nominations sent back to the White House has a realistic chance of being voted out of committee again and being confirmed. Anyone who says otherwise can be easily contradicted by examining the previous pace of the SJC.

It is my supreme hope that the nominee given this single opportunity for confirmation is Keisler. The White House made a huge blunder renominating The Fatal Five in September. Those renominations created a distraction for the Republican senators and emboldened the Democrats to attack and delay the others. Keisler, Livingston, Murphy and Kethledge should not have their nominations further damaged due to complications concerning The Fatal Five.

If the White House is smart, only Keisler will be renominated in November. That way the Republicans can concentrate on his confirmation solely with no interference or complicating factors. There could be a real benefit to this one-track strategy. If quickly sent to the Senate floor, Keisler could easily become the key to forcing the nuclear option on the Democrats. As pointed out in previous thread by HenryClay, Keisler is not flawed like the The Fatal Five. With his excellent professional credentials and reputation, he could easily garner the 51 votes needed to pass the nuclear option unlike Boyle, Myers, Haynes, Smith and Wallace.

After Keisler has been confirmed, then The Fatal Five could be renominated in January if necessary.

Bobo, there's nothing to stop the Senate from dealing with Keisler first, regardless of who else is nominated.

In any event, it seems that the Senate will be coming back on Thursday, Nov. 9, 2006 for the introduction of bills. Then they start morning business on November 13, for a period of ten to thirteen days. As far as I’m aware, business meetings may start as early as November 9, and may finish as late as two full weeks later.

Mr. President, send back whoever you want - none of the 6 has a chance at confirmation in the 109th Congress.

If it's confirmation numbers that you want, send the 6 most liberal candidates that the DEMs offer. They'll be conformed forthwith, just to demonstrate the goodwill of the Democrats, and the comity and collegiality of the Republicans.

Andrew, if The Fatal Five are misguidely renominated at this point, the Democrats will use them like they did this September to create a distraction. Why play into the Dems' gameplan? If you do, the SJC Republicans will be left in the same previous situation of missing executive meetings in order to avoid dealing with The Fatal Five and nothing will happen. After September's performance, everyone should be able to clearly see that neither Frist nor Specter want to deal with The Fatal Five.

It should be obvious to you by now that those five do not have the necessary support of Senate Republicans to be confirmed. I have been listening to all your cheerleading about them since late April. It has all come to naught. Why expend anymore time and energy on nominees who the SJC is now actively avoiding? To make matters worse for them, Frist and Specter will be even less inclined to deal directly with them if the Democrats pick up 2-3 senate seats in the midterm elections.

We are at the point where these five nominations have become pointless. Frist will never use them to pass the nuclear option or to make any other senators accountable. He has had over 1 1/2 years since the Gang deal was signed to do what you want, but he has chosen not to.

Nothing is going to change this course of events - not even after the departure of Frist. With more Democrats in the Senate, the power of Republican mavericks like Warner, McCain and Graham will only increase, and none of them will back the nuclear option for The Fatal Five. Let it go. Rightly or wrongly, The Fatal Five have become albatrosses around the necks of both the Senate Republicans and the newer judicial nominees.

If the Democrats pick up 2-3 senate seats in the midterm, it will be the end of strictly conservative judicial nominees. It doesn't mean that Bush needs to start nominating liberals, but it does mean that we will see more Sandra Ikutas and Milan Smiths. That is why Keisler needs to be confirmed before the 110th Congress without any interference from The Fatal Five.

I don't believe Kiesler would be confirmed by the 109th, even if he was the only nominee presented.

The point of renominating the fatal-5 isn't to get confirmations, it's to get a process that results in up or down votes. Like I said, if one's object is to get more confirmations, then one should send nominees who "aren't conservative."

As for the fatal-5 being a distraction, it's within Specter's power to focus on one nominee to the exclusion of others. The Senate deals with distractions on a continuous basis.

I agree with your predicted outcome, by the way. I have for a few months felt that the 109th lacked the will to make the confirmation process / abuse of cloture an issue. COA confirmations are over for the 109th, although I'd be happy to be proven wrong with a Kiesler confirmation.

We are at the point where these five nominations have become pointless.

It's looking like any nominations above the district level are pointless, since the Senate GOP has caved on acting on almost all of them. Sickening.

If the Fatal Five is renominated in addition to Keisler, Specter will have to deal with certain short-sighted conservative senators and special interest groups who could cause untimely delays in Keisler's confirmation process by pressing Boyle and company. If he works exclusively on the confirmation of Keisler over the renominated Fatal Five, Specter opens himself up to all types of conservative griping and recriminations which will only serve to embitter him and help the Democrats create a smokescreen of confusion.

If only Keisler is renominated, those same Republican senators and special interest groups will not be able to complicate the process with demands for equal attention for their pet nominees. With conservatives united squarely behind a push for Keisler, with no other distractions, Specter will stand a much better chance of getting Keisler voted out of committee. There will be less for the Democrats to complain about. For example, the Dems wont be able to say that the White House isn't listening. There would be no way for them to ignore the fact that FIVE nominees have not been renominated. That makes Bush sound much more reasonable and takes a lot of hot air out of their balloon.

I say "so what." Even if Keisler is the only one renominated, that ALONE is enough to touch off a DEM firestorm and scare off the GOP. Keisler won't be confirmed, even if his is the only nomination refreshed.

But to your point that giving in makes one appear more reasonable, it sure does. Yes it does. The quiet one always appears more reasonable.

Somebody isn't fighting for what is right, and it's not the DEMs who are slacking in that regard.

"The point of renominating the fatal-5 isn't to get confirmations, it's to get a process that results in up or down votes."

I'm sorry, cb, but IMO that makes no sense at all. Wasn't the point of renominating them the FIRST time to get this process of up or down votes going? Frist & Specter have shown they have no interest at all in starting this process.

"As for the fatal-5 being a distraction, it's within Specter's power to focus on one nominee to the exclusion of others."

Of course it is, and it always has been. Specter has lied shamelessly for months now. Why in the world would anyone think all of a sudden he'd go 'Ah, let's focus on Mr. Keisler' if everybody gets renominated?

Whatever he was in the past, Specter has absolutely proven that he won't do a thing for conservative judges now, aside from superstar SC nominees who can do the Kabuki(JGR, Alito), or those he's pre-approved(Wilkinson, KWiliams).

I was one of those who thought that, all things considered, it was better to appease Specter by giving him the chairmanship. Maybe I was wrong. Specter did nothing special for JGR & Alito, the Big Three, or Kavanaugh, and he's done less than nothing since.

I wonder what Santorum's thinking right now. He's in deep trouble, Specter hasn't helped him at all, and conservative judges are hanging by a thread. And Frist has just commited political suicide. Remarkable. Of course, all Specter cares about is Roe not being overturned on his watch, so there ya go.

BoBo, actually the WH should send back Keisler; announce that Myers, Haynes, and Boyle won't be renominated; and then also send Smith back but in the Myers spot. It won't happen.

Bush wouldn't even recognize any of these guys names, let alone have any idea of proper strategy or tactics to get them confirmed. Why he & Rove don't recognize how important this issue is, both short- & long-term, is mind-boggling.

Everybody will be renominated. The headlines will read, "Bush Renominates Controversial Judicial Nominees Again". Cornyn & Kyl will make noise on Hewitt's show. Specter will make noise somewhere. Meetings will be scheduled, Liddy & Lauch will make noise, and people here will get their hopes up. Nothing will happen.

DeWine, Burns, Santorum, & Menendez will all lose. Pork Chop Allen will barely win, and Crooked Cantwell will barely lose. No SCOTUSJ's will retire voluntarily until at least 7/09. If there ARE retirements the nominees will be Callahan, then Ikuta.

The Dead Three will keep getting renominated and go nowhere. Keisler will eventually slip thru. Wallace won't, and the RSenators will do nothing to discredit the ABA. Nor will they do anything to expose Feinstein's nonsense about Trott being a Cali judge.

A nominee likely won't be decided on for Luttig's seat. Even if Myers evetually withdraws, the WH won't think to switch Smith over and reach some compromise involving Levi. Even if Boyle & Haynes withdraw they won't be replaced by PClement & CNelson types, if nominees are even decided on. Leader McConnell will make a lot of noise on FOX-TV, but Specter will undercut him at every turn.

Sad, but I don't see it any other way. We're now in the "Gotta keep voting for them 'cause at least they're not Dems" phase, which always leads to disaster at some point.

If they focused on Keisler he would be confirmed, whether in a Rep Senate or a Dem Senate.

I think Kiesler will be confirmed, just not in the 109th Congress.

As for my "The point of renominating the fatal-5 isn't to get confirmations, it's to get a process that results in up or down votes." making no sense, I agree with the rebuttal "Wasn't the point of renominating them the FIRST time to get this process of up or down votes going?"

And that objective is still a worthy one. But if the objective is to get confirmations, not votes, then the president has to find nominees who pass a 60 vote hurdle.

Said another way, the propriety of the 60 vote hurdle isn't challenged unless there is a contentious nominee. Send nominees the DEMs like, and they get votes, no sweat. AND, the President gets to appear reasonable too.

Bah.

"Said another way, the propriety of the 60 vote hurdle isn't challenged unless there is a contentious nominee. Send nominees the DEMs like, and they get votes, no sweat. AND, the President gets to appear reasonable too.

Bah."

That is true that if Bush only sends in nominees the Dems like, that 60 vote hurdle will never be challanged. However, if the contentious nominees in question can't get the Republicans behind them, even Republicans NOT in the Gang of 14, that 60 vote hurdle is not going to be challenged either.

We cannot even get Republican members of the SJC to show up to even have committee votes on these people.

We just do not have enough Republicnas that are truly committed to the cause of confirming strong nominees to the bench.

I had asked some time ago about how many non-Gang Republicans really would have voted for the nuclear option if it had come up, or if many of the other 48 Republican Senators were very happy to hide behind the 7 GOP Gang members' deal and pretend they were ready to nuke. With the recent SJC activities, I believe I have gotten my definitive answer.

I don't want to imply that I think the nuclear option is a bad procedural maneuver, but it has to have true support to be effective. Unfortunately, the nuclear option doesn't have such support now and hasn't since the Gang of 14 Deal. Instead, we are dealing with a very restrictive set of circumstances involving scared Republicans, a set of circumstances that won't be changing anytime soon, especially with increased Democrat numbers in the next Senate. Blame for this may be easy to assign at the moment, but not particularly helpful in developing a new, more effective strategy against Democrat obstructionism in the 110th Congress.

My purpose in promoting the idea that all the GOP's energy should be focused now exclusively on Keisler's confirmation, without any intervening complications inherent within the renomination of The Fatal Five, is simply an attempt to come up with a new political move that might be more effective in getting Keisler confirmed. True, it is not directly meant to end the judicial filibuster as some would like, but it might easily end up helping in that matter.

My point here is that the past method of forcing the issue of The Fatal Five at every turn has backfired for conservatives. It is time that we stop playing the role of Don Quixote fighting against windmills we cannot win against. Is this capitulation? To some it may be, but it should not be so considered. Since when in a protracted battle is a new strategy something to be spurned - especially if all the old strategies have failed due to lack of support?

I agree with all that you said. Bottom line, the 60 vote hurdle is not being challenged. It's barely discussed, rising as an issue only to a small group of people who have little influence.

Anyway, I came back earlier just to clarify what I meant by the purpose of sending back the fatal-5. I didn't mean to imply that sending them back would be effective, I only meant that the desired effect wasn't necessarily confirmation of the nominee - there is also the object of giving substance to the principle of "giving all nominees a fair up or down vote."

It's clear that the GOP lost the battle over that principle - we don't have enough Republicans who are committed to the principle of getting nominees the up or down vote. I think maybe the only thing we're arguing over is what labels and description to slap onto the loss. Pick whatever label you want - call it "winning" (like Frist does), for all I care.

The new line for "can't be considered" is "when 41 Senators object."

Actually, I think superstar candidates, like JGR, Alito, Kavanaugh, Keisler, and putative candidates like PClem, CNelson, and maybe even ol' JRB for the 1KK-1 SCOTUS opening would have 50 votes to nuke.

The problem is that Haynes, Myers, & almost certainly Boyle don't even have 50 votes to confirm, let alone nuke. RSmith DOES have 50+ to confirm, but not the 60 to slap Dirty Dianne. DDF herself has as much as said she'd vote for Smith if he were switched.

Frist & Specter know all this but they're both engaged in contortions that make John Kerry look like Winston Churchill.

And McCain & Graham have been disgraceful on Haynes.

"Mr. President, members of the US Senate, & my fellow Americans. I can not in good conscience support the nomination of William J. Haynes to the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals. However, in recognition of the Senate's responsibilities under the Constitution, the need to de-politicize the judicial confirmation process, and simple fairness, I urge that this nomination be brought to the floor of the US Senate immediately. I will vote for cloture for this nominee, but will vote against confirmation, for reasons I have stated on numerous occasions. Thank you, and God Bless America."

WTF is SFH about doing that? And you want to be POTUS? GTFOOH. Sheesh.

As for Myers, he should've withdrew 48 hours after Saad did. If Boyle was sacrificed for Kav he needs to be told so, and then he too needs to withdraw. We're not in junior high, doing self-esteem building exercises here.

Great rant. Pretty well sums up my feelings too. The smokescreen of politics is a tiresome charade. It makes electoral sense, but it's not good for the country.

I will say this again, but only Jordan will be confirmed this session.

Also, Bobo's strategy to somehow try to unglue Keisler from the current logjam of 5 other conservatives is wishful thinking. If Sessions isn't on your side then you have absolutely no hope and the longer Keisler dangles the thicker the briefing book gets for Leahy and company.

The best strategy for all the nominees is to force votes. Bush knows this luckily and has made the Senate (who has done him no small favors lately) look extremely foolish by continuing to renominate returned nominees. This is presidential versus senatorial politics. I believe if we can keep 54 seats we may see some of these returned nominees get through next session. If the margin tightens then you will see none of the afermentioned get through.

Hoser, your strategy will never work because it requires that the Senate Republicans to grow a backbone. Since Alito was confirmed last January it has become obvious that NO Republicans are willing to force votes on The Fatal Five. Frist and the SJC Republicans spent a lot of time talking about Boyle and company, but when push came to shove none of them stood up for them. Frist never brought any of them up for full floor votes when he had the chance, and Specter wouldn't even bring up their names at times. To make matters worse, when the SJC Republicans could have forced votes on The Fatal Five in September, people like Hatch, Kyl, Sessions, Graham and Coburn didn't even bother to show up.

When will people understand that NO pressure on Frist, Specter and the SJC Republicans will force them to vote on The Fatal Five? Bush can renominate Boyle and company all he wants as an exercise in futility, but that won't help anything. It will just continue the present gridlock and potentially harm all the newer judicial nominees. If the Democrats pick up 2-3 Senate seats, not even a new Republican majority leader will be able to change things in the 110th Congress.

We need a new strategy now, not an old one that has repeatedly proved to be ineffective with the Republican membership of the Senate. Renomination of the Fatal Five is NOT the right strategy to continue with if we want to see a rise in confirmations.

..I just stumbled across this gem:

"Judge Easterbrook was nominated by Ronald Reagan in August 1984 to a new seat created by 98 Stat. 333, 346; the U.S. Senate did not act on his nomination that year, and he was re-nominated in Reagan's second term on February 25, 1985. He was confirmed by the Senate on April 3, 1985, and received his commission the next day. The American Bar Association gave Easterbrook a low "qualified/not qualified" rating; in 2001, this rating was used as evidence of liberal bias in the ABA when the George W. Bush administration announced that it would no longer seek ABA ratings of judicial nominees."

lol

I now agree with BoBo - we had a window to try and use the 5 to push the judge issue to our benefit, and Frist took a pass. Big mistake, but it's over. Now, we should dump the 5, and for the lame duck, either focus exclusively on either Keisler or the Michigan 2. I don't trust Levin at all, so confirming those 2 would be a good alternative to getting Keisler.

I don't get all this talk of dumping some in exchange for others. We emboldened the Dems this fall to the point where they feel unlimited freedom to block virtually all nominees. If we discard some and try some others again, I expect to hear things like, "This nominee was so controversial that he did not even get a vote in the last Congress, and nothing has changed in the last couple months to make him any less controversial. We cannot risk giving this person a lifetime appointment."

All the people here who have been saying "these few are controversial but these others are a shoo-in" have watched them all get canned. I fear that it doesn't matter who is nominated - unless he or she came from a list preapproved by Leahy and Schumer they are DOA.

I'm not saying my method of isolating Keisler from The Fatal Five is full-proof. What I am saying is that we need to start trying some new methods to promote confirmation (short, of course, of nominating Dem-approved liberals). The old method of beating both Republican and Democrat senators over the head with The Fatal Five hasn't worked and has proven to be ineffectual. My method may not work, but it can't hurt to test it out. Nothing else seems to be working at the moment.

The blocking of judicial nominations and any concomitant pressure to avoid conservative jurists is not an significant issue to the GOP leadership or to the President. There is no longer unwarranted obstruction of judicial nominees, if you follow the silence of GOP leadership on this issue.

FRIST TOUTS SENATE ACCOMPLISHMENTS

... We confirmed the nomination of Alice Fisher as the Assistant Attorney General for the Criminal Division at the Department of Justice. After 17 months of unwarranted obstruction ...

We confirmed the nomination of Kenneth Wainstein as the Assistant Attorney General for the new National Security Division at the Department of Justice -- after 6 months of needless delay. ...

We confirmed 3 judicial nominations -- raising the Circuit Court occupancy rate to 92.2% and the District Court occupancy rate to 95.4%. [notice no complaint about either obstruction or delay] ...

... For month after month after month, 1 Senator held Alice Fisher's and Ken Wainstein's nominations hostage as leverage to extract unrelated information from the Administration. [note absence of complaint about blocking votes on judicial nominees]

Kay Daly from the Coalition for a Fair Judiciary has the scoop in her e-mail today:

"Senator Craig put a hold on ALL judicial nominations because Senator Feinstein put a hold on William Myers. That's why even the nominees who won the lottery and managed to get through committee didn't get a vote on the floor last week.

Now before you think this is a temper tantrum....technically, it's not. I spoke with Senator Craig's office. Senator Craig is actually VERY upset about the holdup on judges and wants other Senators to start making this an issue. Craig has seen Myers have to be renominated 3 times -- and it isn't because there aren't enough votes to pass him on final passage. Fact is, there are filibusters and silent filibusters and Senator Craig has had enough of both.....as we all are. So he is attempting to put a spotlight on the issue.

So there you have it."

If true, I have never heard of anything more ridiculous in my life. This is a prime example of someone cutting off their nose to spite their face. Feinstein could care less about no more Republican judges getting confirmed. In fact, she would probably prefer it that way. In the meantime, Craig has probably DESTROYED the chance that some of those nominees will get confirmed in the upcoming lame duck session.

At present, there is one outstanding COA nominee on the calendar (Jordan) and thirteen district court nominees. If Reid requires each one to have debate before a final full vote, there is no way all of them will get confirmed before the end of the lame duck session. If that's the case, the nonconfirmed ones will be forced into being renominated in January. That means going through committee again with all its inherent possibilities of delay. They may not get confirmed then until February, a full FOUR months after when they could've been confirmed! STUPIDNESS DELUXE.

To make matters worse, what has been achieved with Frist and the SJC Republicans? ABSOLUTELY NOTHING. Does Craig really think that Hatch, Kyl, Graham, Sessions and Coburn are going to now sit through a whole SJC meeting just to vote out Myers? ABSOLUTELY NOT. If they want to avoid him, they will. Even if Myers did by some weird accident get out of committee, does Craig really think Frist or any other new majority leader will bring Myers' name up for a full Senate vote? ABSOLUTELY NOT - NOT WHILE MYERS' NAME IS STILL ON THE ORIGINAL GANG OF 14 DEAL!

This is so disheartening. This is why Keisler needs to be isolated from The Fatal Five, so that individual senators can't cause distractions with nominees who have no chance of confirmation.

What was Craig thinking? Judges won't get highlighted now at all - the donks can truthfully say a Republican is holding them up. I don't like it, but Myers, Boyle, and Haynes are dead. They should have withdrawn like Saad did, but regardless, they'll never get onto the court. The point is to put good conservatives on the bench, so fire up some winners like Caleb Nelson to take their places. Reward the donk obstruction with baggage free, 40 year old righties that will be on the bench for 40 years.

The returns on Sept 29 aren't much of an issue - except it's disheartening to learn with such near certainty that Keisler won't come up for a confirmation vote in the 109th, and Smith got screwed - the others were long-ago "dead," and playing "return-renominate footsie" is meaningful only if a politician uses the event to make political hay.

If Senator Craig says he plans to make judicial confirmation an issue, he ought to be given a chance to do so.

I'm struggling with the story of forcing returns to make nominations more of an issue. The point of "see, they got returned 3 times without a vote" is undermined if the REASON they got returned the 3rd time is your own hand.

Not that judicial confirmations isn't a worthy issue. My sense is that it's not a politically viable issue. The public doesn't care about it, so the politicians risk very few votes (if any at all) by inaction. I don't like the reality, but there it is.