Frist Warns on Filibusters Over Bush Nominees (Nuclear Option)

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/11/12/politics/12frist.html?ex=1258002000&en=be04484d0376b0cd&ei=5088&partner=rssnyt
New York Times Article

UPDATE: CORRECTED LINK

details Frist's speech and options to overturn the filabuster.


Dr. Frist did not specify what action Republicans would take if Democrats sought to derail a nominee through the procedural tactic, a maneuver that requires 60 votes to overcome, when the new Congressional term begins in January. Republicans gained four seats in the elections, bringing them to 55, but still short of a filibusterproof majority.

The Senate Rules Committee approved a plan last year that would gradually lower the threshold for filibusters against judicial nominees until a simple majority would allow a final vote. But a change in the rules requires 67 votes, and lacking anything near that support, the proposal never went to the floor.

Senator Trent Lott, the Mississippi Republican who is chairman of the Rules Committee, has been among the Republicans who have also suggested that the Republicans try to win a change by seeking a ruling from the chairman, a position that a Republican would hold, that filibusters against executive nominations are unconstitutional. A favorable ruling would require just a majority to uphold.

they hold party over country. what slime.

Why hang around to be abused??? Let the REPUGS abuse the country on their own....let them screw themselves........

You know these people really NEED to read the Federalists papers.

And see how by just their majority they are hurting the country.
The Dems will Fillibuster at every single opportunity I HOPE. WHy the hell not? What have they got to loose?

...is any chance of Hillary's judicial appointments going through. Obviously, chimpy's judges are a disaster. But he won't be president forever, and when we get the White House back, there's got to be a way to get judges confirmed. Right now, with the filibusters, it's impossible to confirm judges. That's working for us now, but in four years it won't...

They absolutely control all elections where BBV is allowed.
Look for more BBV in the future.
We must fillibuster EVERY at every opportunity.

:tinfoilhat:

to go through and demonstrate that they are acting in good faith by only blocking the extremists that will wreak terrible damage on the country and Constitution for decades to come.

I don't think that President Clark will have any trouble getting his appointments approved in four years, as they will also be reasonable ones.

walking out if they stop the right to filibuster. Make it impossible to use our voices.

"DEMOCRACY: IT WAS GOOD WHILE IT LASTED"

They may get the filibuster removed this way for judical nominees, but 44 Democratic senators would still be able to make them pay by tying the Senate in knots everywhere else. If they get rid of the filibuster altogether and make alot of restrictive rules about floor amendments the norm, then yeah, walk out and campaign like hell against them for the next 2 years and put them in the minority. Then paybacks will be a bitch. Bill Frist is a total prick. He doesn't care about the Senate as an institution. He doesn't plan to be there very much longer. He's Rove's hired hatchet man sent to do a job with the understanding that he will get a shot at the Presidency in 2008. The Dem's need to go after this guy big time.

Dig in the heels and don't let them take this country further back.

They should filibuster and refuse to stop talking until they get DRAGGED out. I dare them to let us have video for the evening news of Barbara Boxer getting dragged away by guards on the floor of the U.S. Senate.

Of course that would be the Evening News with Dan Rather. Faux would probably show cutaways of Bill Frist sternly banging his gavel.

Don't defend or debate,...just filibuster!!!

Thereafter, cite all the moral relativity by greedy 'pukes and power-mongering neocons!!!

the "lame-duck" session coming up. Don't let the
"conservative" Repukes log-roll the increase to
the national debt into an apporpriations bill.
That issue needs to be an up or down vote also.
While the election was being promoted with all
those "values" the nation legally ran out of
cash. I for one intend to let my Democratic
Senator and Congressman know this, whether they
intend to do anything about it will certainly
influence my vote next time they intend to be
re-elected.

It's Jeb all the way in 2008.

Frist is so stupid, he thinks they actually have some integrity and honor their promises. The laugh will be on him!

lark

There will be Bush fatigue by then, even among alot of the folks that voted for him. Your average, uninformed voter will be have the fuzzy idea that it's time for a new model.

They will have enough for a quorum, so the lack of Democrats will not effect th operation of the chamber.

You need one Dem to suggest the absence of a quorum.

I also suggest that they set up a "congress in exile". When a religious seminary was censored back in the 70s they set up a "sem in ex" and held their classes there. We could pass bills etc. They would have not official power but they would show the public what we would have done it elected. This would allow them to comment on the procedings that the repugs are running by themselves.

pendulum swings back, they could find that filibuster rule quite handy. Right now they're getting awfully cocky even though half of the country is not happy with them.

with the current realignment, it doesn't seem like the GOP will lose its majority in the Senate any time soon.

that didn't work.

Has the minority party (the GOP) used every trick they could muster to dominate the Senate, Congress, White House and Supreme Court?

Possible assassinations --
Manipulated election returns --
Texas redistricting --
More -- lots more dirty tricts --

If the remaining democrats don't find their backbone and find creative ways to express the will of the true majority -- and meekly bows to the GOP -- then we will know that the democratic party as we know it is dead.

I feel sorry for the young people of this country.

Far from a problem. The media just hates that the grassroots are still intact and have landed on their feet.

the grassroots would fold back N2 the woodwork. Nope. sorry, if anything we R even more energized!

Having rolled over for Ashcroft, will the party now roll over for the Second Coming of Ashcroft, Gonzales?

My bet: oh, yes. Very quickly and quietly, too.

...for his generous offering up of his old lady to the MIHOP game.

:nopity:

myself why these guys keep trying to change the Senate rules and Constitution.
Is it unusual for an administration to be so concerned with changing things?
Seems everything they want to change, goes against freedom and personal rights.

That is--nobody could really be that anti-democratic--small "d" democratic. So un-American in a very profound way.

Then you realize: no, you're not paranoid. They're really that bad.

More like a check against the tyranny of a very slim majority. They want to leave 48% of the country with no political representation whatsoever. That's the tyranny.

and every other Republican asshole, Arlen Specter included.

We've had to deal with that shit for the past four years. And the fucking assholes want US to be conciliatory when they propose new judges that will make our lives absolutely fucking miserable? This is SO ridiculous. I know we're living on the edge while the Dems uietly reveal the fraud and corruption, but for the most part, it's killing us to think that these bastards are going to remain in charge for another 4 years.

Goodbye, Roe v Wade
Goodbye ANWR
Goodbye Yellowstone
Goodbye health insurance
Goodbye Social Security
Goodbye progression in the United States
Goodbye to all our allies
Goodbye to all we hold dear
Hello police state, illegal search and seizure
Hello loyalty oaths
Hello iron curtain (or should that now be lead, since these bastards want to play with nuclear bombs?)
Hello devastation of natural resources
Hello death and destruction
Hello global bully.

Under the constitution, no member of the Senate is empowered to determine constitutionality of an issue. That power is wholly vested in the SCOTUS.

We merely raise objection because teh chairman does not have the power to determine constitutionality. Should the chair determine otherwise in a blatant act of tyranny, the enitre Democratic caucus gets up and walks out save for the minority whip who immediately questions teh presence of a quorum.

The Democratic Caucus then files suit against the chair for his abuse of power.

It was OK for Repukes to filibuster Clinton's judicial nominees, or even worse--refuse to allow them to come to a vote--but it's not OK for Democrats to keep Repukes from imposing judicial tyrants on the American people by the only weapon they have left in their arsenal: the filibuster. Nazi tyrants!!!

Does anyboby think we have a chance that cross overs that were critical of Bush in the election will vote with the Dems?

Welcome to DU!! :toast:

Hopefully this will be the counseling I need to get me through this bleak time

have even less spine than the Democrats do. They are so afraid for their jobs that they will roll over on anything for their leadership, and they are too loyal to their party to think of switching over, even though their party is going to purge itself of them anyway.

this is one scary dude

the only good thing about him being in politics is that it got him out of medicine.

than he ever could have in medicine. I fear that he is going to be our next president in '08. This country is truly fucked.

So we should filibuster, eh? Anyone who thinks that the Senate procedural rules won't be changed- please PM me. I have a bridge in NY that's for sale...

How does that work - is it the same as them announcing that being against the war make you unpatriotic?

That's what filibusters were designed to counter.

and 5 (Probably Collins, Snowe, Chafee, Specter and McCain would be my guess) flat out said they would be strongly against it.

I think they're starting to see that even some Republicans won't allow them to put any wack job on the court.

Perverts! Sadists! Sick bastards!

No justice! No peace!

Where's the official "fuck you" thread? Is it still around? Maybe we need a "bite me" thread.

to send the emails or similar to share my feedbacks about that? I think... we need to share our voices with our senates...

The filibuster is a salt-the-earth political tactic of a minority party.

I hope the Dems use it extensively.

I said fight like there is no tomorrow. With Smith, I said it's unfair and undemocratic and 55 million people voted against * and they deserve a voice too.

There will be no more tommorrow! 1984, Handmaidens Tale, Brazil, Metropolis!!!!!!!!!!

Their votes do not count any more. They should let the Republicons hang themselves and make sure we know they did indeed hang themselves.

we aren't affraid of you and one way or another we will put a spine bac in our representatives.

They had better fight like hell for it or they might as well just pack it up and go home because they will have no power left at all.

They should use the fillibuster judiciously, but they must stand firm against extremist judges and extremist legislation. Otherwise, what's the point in even having them. The pukes have us slated for total destruction and elimination. Our elected representatives had better not be complicit in it.

A "filibuster" isn't an act (like somebody saying 'Mr. President, I hereby filibuster this nomination'), it's the process of unlimited debate. The action of cloture is to limit debate to 30 additional hours (among other things).

There would be two ways to stop judicial nomination filibusters with only a majority. The first would be to amend rule XXII to declare that cloture on a matter in executive session is a simple majority, rather than 3/5 of Senators. The second would be to insert a brand-new rule setting up limits for debate on a judicial nomination. Either way, you're blatantly changing the rules.

I really don't see how they can do this. :shrug:

Unfortunately for them, it requires a two-thirds vote to do it.

On top of that, refusal to follow the rules as set by the Senate would be unconstitutional under Article 1, Section 5. clause 2. of the constitution!

Can he do it? I've read somewhere that he can.

Fuck Frist and the horse he rode in on. Until they can populate it 99-1 Republican they are ripe for a filibuster.

them, ok. But try and change them with some end run and see what happens.