GOP Sets Stage for Filibuster Showdown

[Pirate Smile]

Associated Press Writer
15 minutes ago

-snip-
GOP Sen. John Cornyn (news, bio, voting record), a former judge who served with Owen on the Texas Supreme Court, started the countdown Friday by demanding a vote on her nomination. When Democratic leader Harry Reid blocked that vote, Cornyn called for the Tuesday test vote that would lead to a decision on the filibusters of all seven of Bush's blocked judicial nominees.

-snip-
"This extralegal changing of the Senate rules will cause a permanent tear in the Senate fabric because it violates a deeply held American value — playing by the rules," said Sen. Carl Levin (news, bio, voting record), D-Mich.

While it takes 60 votes to overcome a filibuster, Republicans intend to supersede the rule by a simple majority vote. With 55 seats, Republicans could afford five defections if all 100 members vote and still prevail on the strength of Cheney's ability to break ties.

Reid told a group of columnists during the day he was within two votes of having the strength to prevail in a showdown, indicating that four Republicans have agreed to break ranks and side with the Democrats.

more..
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20050520/ap_on_go_co/filibuster_fight

[HawkerHurricane]

1. Public message to Congressman Frist

Screw the 'ratings war'. Either do it or drop it. Call the vote, you piece of slime. I dare you. It's a win/win situation... either you'll lose, or you'll put your party in the public position as extremists you are... and your pretty boy media buddies won't be able to cover it up for you. Put up or shut up, asshole.

[Dave Reynolds]

2. No kidding,

this has been being threatened for how long now? They just need to STFU and go for it, if they have the stones.

[whistle]

3. Just how do the repukes intend to supersede the filibuster rule....

...."While it takes 60 votes to overcome a filibuster, Republicans intend to supersede the rule by a simple majority vote."

In other words, what process will they use? And will that be legal? Rules are made to be broken. Only laws require special measures to be overturned.

[quaoar]

4. Maybe they don't have the cojones to do it

We might have to triple dog dare them.

[HawkerHurricane]

5. The filibuster is a senate rule, not a law.

Senate rules are decided by a simple majority.
You cannot filibuster rules changes.

(Here's a bet no one will take: let's say they change the rules of filibusters, saying that you can't do them for judicial nominees. Then lets say in 2006, the Repukes lose thier majority... badly. Say they only have 35 seats. How much you want to bet that they'll re-instate the filibuster before the new senators are sworn in, and to stop a filibuster will take 66 votes?)

[ribrepin]

10. Is there any question that will happen if they lose the majority

I wouldn't take that bet if you offered me 100 to 1 odds.

[Kagemusha]

6. They'll invent unconstitutionality of the previous rules.

That's the method.

[whistle]

7. So why don't the democrats fight back by called for the rules

..to be changed on every vote, just keep doing the rules change thing, just keep calling it, sort of a stalemate.

[sidpleasant]

9. How it'll go down

As I understand it at some point Frist or one of his vassals will ask the presiding officer of the Senate (you can guarantee that Cheney will be in that seat) for a point of order. Frist will propose that the rule requiring 60 votes for cloture on judicial filibusters is unconstitutional. Cheney will agree. Note the horror of that simple sentence: Dick Cheney - who is not a lawyer! - will rule on a constitutional question. An appeal of Cheney's ruling would then be smashed by a motion to table the appeal which passes on a simple majority. Voila, Cheney's ruling will stand and the 60 vote rule to end judicial filibusters will be dead.

There are a few other ways this can happen but they differ only in the details. All the scenarios star Dick Cheney in his scary new role as a one man Supreme Court ruling on the constitutionality of a Senate rule. If you really want an in - depth explanation of the minutia of the nuclear option here's a good article from Salon:

http://www.truthout.org/docs_2005/printer_051205F.shtml

[Arkana]

8. In the words of a famous idiot:

"Bring it on."