ConfirmThem

I watched all of last night's shenanigans. I was horrified to see McConnell capitulate to Reid. It appears that all he wanted was to get 80+ executive nominations confirmed. Here is the list of confirmations:

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?r110:S04JN8-0018:

There is not a single circuit court confirmation among them. Neither Reid nor Sessions could get any sort of agreement from Reid and Leahy about circuit court judges. The only thing they got out of the Dems was that Kethledge and White would be processed this month, and that three district court nominees already on the Executive Calendar and already approved by a Dem homestate senator (Davis of Virginia, Kays and Limbaugh of Missouri) would get votes next week. Both these things were pretty much already guaranteed. So what did the Republicans really get out of yesterday's forced reading of Boxer's climate change amendment? I say nothing but some executive nominee confirmations.

After all the rhetoric about judges, nothing resulted from it. What a let down.

I wonder who is playing whom in all this hoopla. Is this some orchestrated show between McConnell and Reid allowing each side to foam at the mouth about judges without doing anything about? Or, is there some serious attempt here to get Keisler, Conrad and Matthews confirmed? After last night, I doubt it.

Since McConnell seems unwilling or unable to get Reid to move on circuit court judges, I think it is time the White House stepped in and did a Keisler/Kagan agreement a la the Kethledge/White one. We need something major to jumpstart COA confirmations. McConnell isn't achieving it.

It's impossible to make sense of Reid's contemporaneous "deals" because they are incoherent.

Congressional Record June 4, 2008 - S5021

I'm sure nothing was "gained" in the stunt, that couldn't have been had without the stunt. The District Court nominations would happen, and two more Circuit Court nominations of the DEMs choosing will emerge from Committee AFTER the June 1 Thurmond Rule date.

The DEMs are framing their actions as being in the mold of generosity, not as in the mold of even-handed dealing; when in fact, they are being cut-throat stingy.

The GOP isn't going to escalate this much further, I don't think. It's hand is weaker now than it was with Frist and the GOP in charge of the Senate, and the GOP EXPECTS to lose ground in the 2008 election, so it'll be inclined to tread lightly, lest the repercussions (to those who are elected) be harsh come January.

http://www.rollcall.com/news/25683-1.html

"GOP Still Mad Over Nominees

By Tim Taylor
Roll Call Staff
June 5, 2008, 12:16 p.m.

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) said Thursday morning that he would continue procedural tactics to delay action on the global warming bill unless Democrats consider President Bush’s judicial nominations."

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,363474,00.html

"One thing is clear: McConnell has the support of a majority of his caucus over the issue of nominees, according to numerous GOP aides. Republicans feel this is a strong campaign issue for them that always rouses the party base.

Sen. Sam Brownback, R-Kan., implored Reid to deal with at least three pending nominees to the Fourth Circuit: Peter Keissler, Robert Conrad, and Steve Matthews. In February, Bush brought Conrad and Matthews to the White House to highlight the need for more judicial confirmations.

"Until we get these things resolved, you will see more of this (obstruction)," Brownback said. "We're going to be looking for clarity on this (from Reid). ... This is really going to slow this place down, if not grind it to a halt.""

It's not so terrible, BoBo. They did get all those executive confirmations, and it's clear the Reps are going to continue the delaying tactics until they get some real action on judicial nominees. It's slow and it's not going to be easy, but it's apparent they are working hard on this issue.

SJC Judicial Nomination Hearing scheduled on Wednesday, June 11. 4 District Court nominees. All from New York (Gardelphe, Matsumoto, Seibel, and Suddaby). Ho-hum and a big yawn. So predictable that they'd do the New York ones who mean so little. No Circuit Court nominees, naturally.

This is just a transparently obvious attempt by Leahy and Reid to pad the numbers with insignificant confirmations. This is why I advised months ago not to name more NY District nominees. How pathetic this all is! And how utterly predictable.

Senate Democrats will of course use this rinky dink NY DJ hearing as an excuse for not holding any Circuit Judge hearing during June. I can hear their duplicitous bleating already: "We're working so hard on these many judicial nominees that there's no time to overburden this busy hardworking Committee... And we're processing 55.386% more nominees than the obstructionist Republican Senate did during a comparable period of the Clinton Administration in 1996 (or 2000 or whatever) ..."

While I'd like to see the big Three CCA nominees as well, any judgeships we can fill will help.

Keep in mind that it's district judgeships where a lot of the heavy lifting comes in.

I do agree with the overall sentiment that we need to let McConnell, Sessions, and Brownback know that we're not happy if they are done with this.

Is anyone in the community familiar with the process for selecting district court nominees in NY? More specifically, how much say did Senators Schumer and Clinton have in determining the 4 NY district court nominees?

Also, there is a fifth vacancy in NY-N that dates back to March of 2006. All the other vacancies happened in 2007. Does anyone know why that one seat went unfilled? My first guess is that Schumer/Clinton is saving the seat for someone, but that is complete speculation on my part.

can you get someone at McConnell's office to answer the phone and let you know what is going on with judicial nominees after last night?

Is the slow down on hold until Kethridge / White is done?

-- "Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) said Thursday morning that he would continue procedural tactics to delay action on the global warming bill unless Democrats consider President Bush's judicial nominations." --

Regardless of the unfolding of the nominations skirmishes, the GOP is and has been reasonably objecting to how the Captain Trade / Global Warming bill is being handled.

Senator Reid has effectively precluded amending the Global Warming bill. The cloture vote, to limit debate before voting on passage of the Global Warming bill, will be taken tomorrow morning. It's a slam dunk given that cloture won't be obtained. The goofy energy price bill (S.3044) will be kicking around over the weekend, and will go through a similar process before being dropped on account of not getting 60 votes. That one can't have the "read the bill" delay, because the bill is relatively short.

The GOP has already been blocking DEM legislative initiatives at various stages, so any ratcheting up of that approach will be marginally "effective."

Persistent withholding of consent for committees to meet would be a serious ratcheting up -- but that won't happen.

Oz: Thanks, I think, for the 'rock start" reference, but I don't think I qualify. Nevertheless, McConnell's folks now assure me this is just the start, the opening salvo, with plenty more to come. If so, the Leader deserves praise. I think he is sincere, and I trust him to follow up.

Quin Hillyer

Schumer is actively involved in the District Court nominees in NY, and signs off on them. If he doesn't like them, he kills them, as he did with Mary Donohue's nomination to the Northern District vacancy you mentioned. She was nominated in the fall of 2000 on Gov. Pataki's recommendation (she had been his lieutenant governor, as well as a DA and NY Supreme Court judge), but Schumer didn't like her so he waited until Spitzer became gov and he and Spitzer sank her nomination, which was withdrawn this past fall or winter. Despicable - she was highly qualified and generally liked, but it's hard being a Republican in NY politics, and it's especially hard being a Republican woman in NY politics.

That being said, the District Court nominees Schumer has signed off on in NY have generally been very good nominees - mostly AUSAs (or USAs), or prominent litigation partners at big NYC firms.

Make that the fall of 2006, not 2000.

But for the fact that I've learned from endlessly repeated bitter experience over the past decade, I'd be amazed that there are still suckers around (even here) who invariably fall for the latest Democrat ploy. And since the average GOP Senator is much more feckless and stupid than the average poster here, I have no doubt that this latest Democrat trick will succeed like most of the previous ones.

Yeah, I too have really high hopes that at this ultra-late date (two months before election year adjournment and 5 days after commencement of the "Thurmond-Leahy Rule"), McConnell is now going to get really tough and do Big Things to get CCA nominees confirmed. I also believe in the Tooth Fairy and Big Rock Candy Mountain.

BRW, who was the legislative "brains" behind bungling amateur Bill Frists' 4 year feckless stint as majority leader, when so many fine CCA nominees were abandoned to limbo "imposed" by a headstrong Democrat minority? Answer: Majority Whip Mitch McConnell.

I don't think you're giving McConnell the credit he deserves. He has previously run rings around Reid (granted, not too hard to do) several times and will continue to do so. I think McConnell's doing an excellent job, playing a great game of chess (which game requires patience).

Just as an aside, there was a day or two when the senate was at a 49-49 count. This was due to the fact that Kennedy and Byrd were in the hospital. I don't wish any of them ill, just pointing out a factual statistic.

The Senate Judiciary Committee now has an executive business meeting scheduled for Thursday June 12, 2008.

Helene White, Raymond Kethledge, and Stephen Murphy are on the agenda.

http://judiciary.senate.gov/meeting_notice.cfm?id=3409

A recent article from FoxNews.com:

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,363474,00.html

http://www.law.com/jsp/article.jsp?id=1202421974827

"The United States Constitution: It's not just for conservatives anymore.

With that thesis in mind, a new liberal think tank and public interest law firm launched in Washington, D.C., on Tuesday, hoping to catch a progressive wave in both election politics and scholarly research on the meaning of the nation's founding document.

"There's nobody out there systematically making the argument that the Constitution's text and history are on the progressive side," says Douglas Kendall, founder of the new Constitutional Accountability Center. "The Constitution is, in its most vital respects, a progressive document."

To spread the word and take it into court, Kendall has assembled liberal stalwarts -- and liberal money -- to back his effort and support his view that, unlike unsuccessful liberal efforts in the past, his approach of embracing the Constitution's text has the best shot of recapturing the constitutional high ground from conservatives. Yale Law School's Akhil Amar and Jack Balkin and Duke's Walter Dellinger are advisers, and George Soros' Open Society Institute is a major funder. Ron Klain, former chief of staff to Al Gore and now an investment adviser for progressives, is also on board. Startup money totals nearly $2 million."

"The Economist" magazine just ran an editorial on the Democrats' shenanigans in holding up Bush's nominees on the Central Bank Committee.

If this is how the Democrats want to play, every bill should be filibustered.

Shame on Republicans in Virginia and Montana (and, to a lesser degree, in Missouri, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Rhode Island), for staying home in 2006. Because Foleygate was such a big deal, we end up with crippling vacancies on the courts and other places, and we also face a risk that those vacancies will be filled by a guy who is one of the most liberal elected officials in the country.

We've got to teach the dems a lesson. I'm donating $50 to McCain's campaign today. I wish I could afford more but that will have to wait a few weeks. (I may have a raise coming.)

Proudly supporting John S. McCain for President (McCain/Romney?)