As expected, the White House has picked yet another fight over judges with Senate Dems.
Following through on a promise he has made repeatedly since his victory in November, President Bush yesterday renominated 12 candidates for federal appeals court seats whose confirmations were blocked by Senate Democrats during his first term.
The renomination of the judicial candidates promises to once again ignite an intense partisan battle with Senate Democrats. They have vowed to thwart Bush’s nominees, whom they consider too conservative.
This comes as a surprise to no one. It’s a shame Bush would rather push division than work with Dems to build on his sweeping success in first-term judicial confirmations, but as we well know, he’s a divider, not a uniter. As Harry Reid noted yesterday:
“Last year, the Senate worked to confirm 204 of the President’s judicial nominees and rejected only the 10 most extreme. This confirmation record is better than that achieved by President Clinton, President George H.W. Bush and President Reagan. Despite our unprecedented effort to work with the President in discharging our constitutional duty to advise and consent to his nominees, today he renominated 7 of the 10 rejected nominees. We should not divert attention from other pressing issues facing this nation to redebate the merits of nominees already found too extreme by this Chamber.
“To replay this narrow and completed debate demonstrates the Bush Administration’s failure to craft a positive agenda for the American people.”
The real question is whether Senate Republicans are going to bring this fight to a screeching halt by pursuing the “nuclear option.” At this point, Bill Frist claims he has the votes.
Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist says he has the 51 votes needed to change Senate rules and make it easier for Republicans to overcome Democratic filibusters against President Bush’s judicial nominees, but he hopes such a change won’t be necessary.
“We need to restore the over 200-year tradition and precedent of allowing every nominee of the president who has majority support an up-or-down vote on the floor of the United States Senate,” Mr. Frist told The Washington Times on Thursday.
Putting aside for the moment the fact that Frist believed the polar opposite when he supported a filibuster of a Clinton judicial nominee, there’s the more pertinent issue of whether Frist is bluffing.
Clearly, the Majority Leader wants Dems to believe he can move on the “nuclear option” whenever he wants. The point is to intimidate Dems from filibustering the worst of Bush’s judicial nominees — they’re supposed to be too afraid to block the would-be judges for fear of Frist’s radical response.
But there’s the rub: Frist may have the votes needed to pull this stunt off or he may not. He has 55 Republicans in his caucus and needs 51 votes to follow through on the “nuclear option.” At last count, at least seven GOP senators — McCain, Hagel, Chafee, Snowe, Collins, Warner, and Specter — have either announced their opposition to the plan or expressed serious reservations. Of those seven, if five follow through and oppose the change to the Senate’s filibuster rules, Frist loses and Dems continue to block the worst of Bush’s nominees.
And let’s also not forget that if Frist isn’t bluffing, and the Senate approves the “nuclear option,” Frist may regret it. Senate Dems have vowed to effectively shut down the chamber indefinitely should the GOP majority gut the chamber’s filibuster rules.
The whole mess may end up looking like a political train wreck of the Republicans’ making. Stay tuned.