Terrible Deal
By DanCT Posted in Senate Rules — Comments () / Email this page » / Leave a comment »
It is impossible to say whether this is a "terrible" deal, a "bad" deal, or a very, very marginally "ok" deal, but it surely is not a good deal.
It's terrible, Hugh.
1. Democrats agree to allow votes on three nominees, but make no commitment on the others. [It's amazing how a minority of Senators is able to dictate terms to a fairly large majority.]
2. Democrats reserve the right to filibuster: "Nominees should only be filibustered under extraordinary circumstances, and each signatory must use his or her own discretion and judgment in determining whether such circumstances exist."
3. Republicans give up any check on the minority's power: "...we commit to oppose the rules changes in the 109th Congress."
The commitment to oppose rules changes is unconditional. There is no out clause such as, "We commit, so long as Democrats are not abusing their discretion in our eyes. " Instead, it says, "We trust that the Democrats won't filibuster Luttig, McConnell, Estrada, Alito, or whomever is nominated to the Supreme Court unless they, in their own discretion, decide they want to. For our part, we put it in writing that we won't support any rules change because our trust in those Democrats is absolute. Trust but verify? Nah. That's mean. We just trust--period."

Recent comments
SG is certainly possible
(2 years 34 weeks ago)Kathleen Sullivan earns a victory; what might be in her future?
(2 years 34 weeks ago)vote scheduled Tuesday for Obama's first district court nominee
(2 years 34 weeks ago)Мысли...
(2 years 34 weeks ago)Ginsburg hospitalized after feeling faint
(2 years 34 weeks ago)Sotomayor joins cert pool
(2 years 34 weeks ago)Carl Tobias 9/23 article on filling 2nd Circuit COA vacancies
(2 years 34 weeks ago)Thx
(2 years 35 weeks ago)Great blog!
(2 years 35 weeks ago)It appears that Sonia Sotomayor has placed herself
(2 years 35 weeks ago)