Nuclear Option: GOP Backing Down? genre: Polispeak

A recent push by the GOP to bring the issue of judicial appointments to the forefront has once again raised the question of the "nuclear option". The term is the name given to the possibility of changing the rules to prevent the filibuster of presidential nominees who have been selected to fill court vacancies. Since a compromise deal was brokered by the "Gang of 14", the issue has received little attention. With the approaching midterm elections, some Republicans see the issue as a winning issue. Others are fearful that enacting the option may give Democrats a powerful weapon should they take control of the Senate in November. The Hill has the full article here.

If Republicans change Senate rules to bypass filibusters and win confirmation for President Bush’s controversial nominees to the judiciary, what is known as the “nuclear option," these conservatives fear that, should Democrats win the majority in the fall, Republicans would be handing them a powerful weapon that could be used to move pet executive-branch nominees or legislation.

“Everyone, I think, who has ever carried the water for the conservative movement in the Senate believes it’s a horrible idea," said Mike Hammond, former general counsel to the Senate Steering Committee, the traditional base of operations for Senate conservatives. “Most of us feel that it is functionally impossible to separate filibusters of judges from filibusters of nominees from filibusters of legislation."

Former Sens. Malcolm Wallop (R-Wyo.) and Jim McClure (R-Idaho) wrote an op-ed in The Wall Street Journal last year condemning the “nuclear option," in part, they wrote, because it could be extended to other executive-branch nominations and legislation.

“Conservatives, in and out of the Senate, are now being assured that this extraordinary approach will not be applied to the legislative filibuster, which, in the not-so-distant past, was our only defense against the excesses of a bipartisan liberalism," they wrote.

Contrary to the assertions of nuclear-option supporters, they argued that the Senate is a continuing body and that its rules carry over from one Congress to the next.

You can read a prior Thought Theater posting on the issues surrounding judicial appointments here.

Daniel DiRito | May 16, 2006 | 10:58 AM
AddThis Social Bookmark Button

Comments

1 On May 16, 2006 at 3:10 PM, Jimi wrote —

“Conservatives, in and out of the Senate, are now being assured that this extraordinary approach will not be applied to the legislative filibuster, which, in the not-so-distant past, was our only defense against the excesses of a bipartisan liberalism," they wrote.
What's this? Not soon after emasculating the American People the Senate turns the knife on itself? Not just once? I guess whatever it takes to serve their corporate masters must and will be done.

Politics/Corporatists impugn all forms of government now. Am I surprised we are recognizing it in the judiciary? No. What would surprise me are the absences of a litmus test and the promotion of good, impartial judges vetted and appointed by a bi-partisan Senate.

Wazzat? Sounds like my alarm clock.

Thought Theater at Blogged

Post a comment


Trackback Pings

TrackBack URL for this entry


© Copyright 2024

Casting

Read about the Director and Cast

Send us an email

Select a theme:

Critic's Corner

 Subscribe in a reader

Encores

http://DeeperLeft.com

Powered by:
Movable Type 4.2-en

© Copyright 2024

site by Eagle River Partners & Carlson Design