ConfirmThem

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

The Senator from West Virginia did an interview yesterday with Alan Colmes:

[T]he president [of the United States] is all wrong when he maintains that a nominee should have an up-or-down vote. The Constitution doesn't say that. The Constitution doesn't say that that nominee shall have any vote at all. There doesn't have to even be a vote....This is about freedom of speech. Men have lived and died for and shed their blood for centuries for that right to speak, to speak out, to speak out against the king, as it were.

After Senator Byrd and the other minority Senators have had a year or so to debate a nomination, it seems reasonable that they should be required to let other Senators --- the Senators in the majority --- speak up and announce their advice and consent, instead of muzzling those other Senators.

Senator Byrd might also take a peek at Senate Rule 31, which Senator Hatch cited on the Senate floor yesterday. The Constitution is not the only relevant law here. Senate Rule 31 says that if a nomination reaches the full Senate, then it can only be "rejected by the Senate" if there is a "majority" vote.