ConfirmThem

By AndrewHyman Posted in Senate Rules — Comments () / Email this page » / Leave a comment »

In 2001, long before the first nomination filibuster in American history that ever lasted all the way to the end of a congressional session, the following was written about the Senate's advice and consent role.

In more than 200 years of advice, consent, dissent, libel, slander, character assassination, and other senatorial courtesies, countless nominees have had their sanity questioned, their private lives dissected, their families scrutinized, and their honeymoon videotapes broadcast as one group or another sought to torpedo their nominations.

It's an ugly, gruelling, unfair, and extremely entertaining process, but, like everything else in this best of all possible worlds, it's all for the best and couldn't possibly be any better. By giving nominees this test of fire, the stupidest, weakest, and most dangerously demented of them are weeded out, and only the cleverest and most deceitful bastards are granted senatorial consent. We certainly need clever and deceitful bastards in the Executive and Judicial Branches if they're going to have any hope of holding their own against the nutjobs we elect into the Legislative branch.

But now, the Democrats elected to the Senate have seriously outdone themselves.

The Senate rules allow nominations to be filibustered, but the minority Democrats now use that as a loophole to REJECT a nomination, by filibustering all the way until the nomination is forced to expire at the end of a session. In actual reality, however, Senate Rule 31, Sections 3 and 4 say that "when a nomination is confirmed or rejected" by the full Senate it must be by MAJORITY vote. So, when Harry Reid promises a filibuster that will last not a few days nor a few weeks, but instead will last "all the hours in the universe," he is indicating that Rule 31 will be broken. It's that simple.

Nominations that have reached the Senate floor have sometimes legitimately lapsed when there has not been time to fully consider them, or when the Senate has wanted to start fresh the next session, or when other pressing matters have arisen. But nominations do not legitimately lapse when a minority simply decides to kill them. I'm not making up Rule 31, Sections 3 and 4. Go take a look. While you're at it, take a look at Rule 28, Section 2, which shows that the word "reject" does not have some narrow, technical meaning that presumes a formal vote of the Senate has occurred.

So, it looks like either Rule 31 needs to be enforced, or the text of the Senate Rules needs to be amended.