ConfirmThem

http://thehill.com/leading-the-news/fec-agreement-breaks-down-over-nomin...

"A Democratic move to install new members of the Federal Election Commission by next week and resurrect a dead agency fell apart when talks between the White House and Democratic Senate leaders broke down late Wednesday.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) and the Bush administration failed to come to agreement on the sixth commissioner, who would replace Hans von Spakovsky, the controversial GOP nominee that withdrew his name last Friday after a standoff with Democrats that lasted months and shuttered the FEC."

"Reid plans to keep the Senate in a series of pro forma sessions over the Memorial Day recess to prevent Bush from appointing nominees to the positions while Congress is out of town."

2 distict judges were voted out:
William T. Lawrence to be United States District Judge for the Southern District of Indiana
G. Murray Snow to be United States District Judge for the District of Arizona

No action on the Michigan judges (the committee has not received the ABA-ratings and the answers to written questions).

Leahy was positive about Glen Conrad. He will likely get a hearing in June.

What if the Senate confirms Kethledge, White and G. Conrad in June? Won't that blunt any Republican complaints about Keisler, R. Conrad and Matthews? The only problem with this scenario is whether or not G. Conrad can get his ABA rating in June. Helene White was nominated 4/15 and has not received hers yet. Glen Conrad was nominated on 5/8. Any guesses on how long his will take to do?

If the Dems do process Kethledge, White and G. Conrad in June, that forces any consideration of Keisler, R. Conrad and Matthews into July. It should be pointed out, like bk mentioned in the previous thread, discharge petitions can be either voted down or filibustered. That means any July fight over nominees might just be symbolic and not really useful except to highlight an election year issue.

http://judiciary.senate.gov/member_statement.cfm?id=3375&wit_id=2629

"With respect to the judicial nominations from Michigan on which I chaired a hearing on May 7, I understand that they have now submitted written responses to the follow up questions propounded to them last Wednesday by the Republican members of the Committee. In my effort to accommodate those Senators, I have not listed those nominations today. When we receive the updated ABA ratings and after Senators have had an opportunity to review the written responses to their questions, I expect to include the Michigan nominees on our next agenda for Committee consideration. My efforts to expedite Committee action on that group of nominees were not as successful as I had hoped, but we should be able to make progress next month.

The Senate did complete consideration of the nomination of Steven Agee to a Virginia vacancy on the Fourth Circuit. When we have received the ABA rating on the President’s nomination of Glen Conrad to the other Virginia vacancy on that circuit court, we will see whether there remains time this year, consistent with the Thurmond rule, to consider that nomination, as well."

I am a little concerned by Leahy saying he would have to review if the Thurmond Rule would allow further consideration of Glen Conrad's nomination. He again seems to be misrepresenting the content of the Thurmond Rule. The Thurmond Rule deals only with "controversial" nominees. If Glen Conrad is "noncontroversial" (which it would seem he is since he is supported by both Warner and Webb), then the Thurmond Rule shouldn't factor into any consideration of his nomination and confirmation.

June is going to be a war if the Republicans actually decide to really fight. It now appears that most of us were wrong about the ABA rushing the ratings to get White through this month. My guess is that the Democrats instructed their ABA minions to slow down the White evaluation so that the Michigan nominees' Committee votes will be delayed until June, thus minimizing the number of subsequent CCA confirmations to 1 or 0 (see Leahy's Statement).

Some here may recall that I analyzed the wording and numerous qualifications in Reid's "promise" last month to confirm 3 nominees in May, showing how it was really no promise at all. The predictable Democrat refusal to confirm Kethledge and Keisler to achieve the "promise" of 3 CCA confirmations shows conclusively that what I wrote a month ago was correct: Reid was implicitly lying all along. Typical.