First off, my impression is that Reid had precious little to do with this deal. This is a deal agreed upon by seven Democratic senators and seven Republican senators, none of whom, from what I can tell, are from the leadership. Reid gave the deal his blessing afterwards, but I get the impression that he's putting the best face on the deal. The spokesman for the Democratic side in this deal is Lieberman.
Second, I agree that Frist and Dobson are losers in this deal, but I also contend that the winners are McCain and Bush. The Democrats who signed onto this deal agreed not to filibuster except under "extraordinary circumstances", and the Republicans agreed not to invoke the nuclear option. However, the Republicans do not need to invoke the nuclear option so long as the Democrats do not filibuster. If Lieberman and company decide to support a filibuster, there will be great pressure on the Republicans to declare that the Democrats broke their part of the agreement. This whole business will start over again, this time with the Republicans charging that the Democrats are to blame because they broke the deal.
Not that it will ever come to a filibuster. In effect, Owen and Brown set the standard for any future nominees. How could the moderate Democrats deny an up-or-down vote on any nominee to the left of Owen and Brown after this deal?
What's going to happen is that, at the next Supreme Court vacancy, Bush will invite the Moderate 14 to the White House, and they'll talk about potential nominees and get all giggly and bipartisan and all that, and the Moderate 14 will talk about how wonderful advice and consent is. And then Bush will nominate Attila the Hun, and the Moderate 14 will vote to confirm, because Bush did ask first.
Posted by ploeg at May 23, 2005 10:49 PMploeg, that may be, but don't be so sure about that "standard" being so concrete.
Like the Blog Lord says, people aren't really paying that much attention.
And it was only the signers that agreed to that, not all the Democrats.
And I'm pretty sure that Reid had plenty to do with the deal. Sometimes people just know the right thing to do, what their bosses want, without having some friggin preacher splainin it to them.
I vented earlier, I'm not real happy with the situation, but frist and dobson took a hit, especially frist, who is, toast.
He should have known bushco wasn't going to entertain his ambitions, just shows how weak he really is.
But the thought of having to be decent to republicans, any of them, disturbs me. Bootlicking cowards for the most part. Empty cowards like powell and lugar.
I want to trash republicans, not deal with them, dammit!
Oh well, when we regain control, maybe then we can impeach all of bush's judges?
Posted by Duckman GR at May 23, 2005 11:05 PMSteve, excellent post. I was disappointed about the deal at first, since it let three nominees come to the floor for a vote, and it left open the possibility that the GOP Taliban could try the nuclear option again. But the more I think about it, the more I believe that this was a significant victory against a radical GOP power grab. The long-term stakes matter more than the short-term stakes, and there I think we clearly came out ahead. Anyway, very thoughtful comments -- thank you!
Posted by Cindy K at May 24, 2005 12:26 AMThis deal doesn't seem much different than what Reid offered on several occasions, perhaps better for the Dems because of the pledge that the rules won't be changed without 2/3 in the current Congress (until 2007). Reid's leadership was key in keeping the party together and making way for something to be compromised with.
On the other hand, Brown, Owen and Pryor are really awful. Especially Brown on the DC circuit where her pre-1930 views on regulatory agencies can hurt a lot. If she is one of those rumored to be voted down, then the Dems have truly won the deal.
Being in the minority by so many votes really sucks. The Lieberman smile and talk tonight was truly sickening. I'm learning to really want his hide tacked to the wall in the next election for him.
So the Dems get to fight again another day. I suspect the next SCOTUS vacancy will go to Atty. Gen. Alberto Gonzales since Bush can be assured that he won't be awful enough to get the Dems to filibuster. Bush has been warned. Lets see if he's willing again to push the TheoReich candidates for other SCOTUS candidates.
Posted by JimPortlandOR at May 24, 2005 12:29 AMOne hopeful outcome of this debacle is that, for the frist time in the Bush Administration's history, the "moderate" Republicans have finally risen up on their hindquarters and just said no. Of course, it was strictly self-survival. It was finally clear that if they didn't assert power now, they would have been ignored by the "leadership and, in all probability, would have been undermined by the theofascists in their next re-election campaigns.
We can only hope that they can resist the shitstorm coming their way and develop a taste for power. Such slender reeds on which we all lean!
Posted by DeminNewJ at May 24, 2005 03:23 AMWhat center? Only in the fucked up world of the senate are Warner and McCain considered "the center." The Democrats gained nothing from this. The Republicans only had their appetite whetted. They will be back. And not just on judicial nominees. (Hint: can you say social security).
Reid had little to do with this. I don't give him blame or credit.
Posted by Paleo at May 24, 2005 03:27 AMhurumphf!
Posted by gail davis at May 24, 2005 03:58 AMOne more point---
There's nothing guaranteeing that the GOP won't try the "nuclear option" at a later date. Frankly, nothing would make me happier.
There's a reason why the GOP leadership was willing to entertain this fight now, a year and a half before the midterm elections, and over relatively smaller judicial appointments: they know they will need to push a moderate image for the non-wingnut populace in order to win. This fight was to give the hardline nutcases something to keep them happy and in line.
Now, they can't have either. When the first loony-tunes Supreme Court nominee comes up for confirmation, the Dems will be able to mount a high-profile filibuster over the nominee's abysmal record and on principle, and the GOP will be forced to either 1) screw the hardline base yet again or 2) throw any appearance of moderation overboard. With any luck, this will happen next year in the runup to the 2006 midterm elections.
The Democrats not only appeared statesmanlike and mainstream and moderate in this whole affair, and kept several judges from up-or-down votes (when it's likely the GOP would have gotten them all otherwise) and made Frist and co. out to be a bunch of wackos with no respect for decency or the rules, to boot. They set up a major quandry for the GOP's 2006 electoral chances.
The only potential benefit out of this fight for the GOP was keeping the wingnut base happy with an "in-your-face", toughguy, ruthless, all-or-nothing win over the "obstructionist liberal Demon-crats". And that was worth a hell of a lot to them, considering the political damage the GOP incurred in the process. Now, they've suffered the damage without getting the benefits, and they've been set up for more of the same later on.
And that, to me, is a solid win.
Posted by Jonathan at May 24, 2005 05:07 AMA thoughtful examination, but not fully convincing. The results of this compromise is like standing on the dock along Battleship Row on December 8, 1941 and proclaiming "At least Tennessee and Maryland are still afloat!" We'll pretend not to notice that the sunken hulks of the other ships prevent their being moved for use - only in this scenario, the enemy battle fleet is arriving just outside the harbor.
Mary provided the 'moderate' Democrat list somewhere in the comments sections. I noted that all of the Democrats who are leaning toward supporting John Bolton were among those who made this 'deal'. I guess that means that our new UN Ambassador can now get to work and destroy any semblance of world diplomacy.
Posted by pessimist at May 24, 2005 05:18 AMThe results of this compromise is like standing on the dock along Battleship Row on December 8, 1941 and proclaiming "At least Tennessee and Maryland are still afloat!" We'll pretend not to notice that the sunken hulks of the other ships prevent their being moved for use - only in this scenario, the enemy battle fleet is arriving just outside the harbor.
This presumes, of course, that it any of the battleships would have come out unscathed, otherwise. And it ignores the very real electoral benefits the Democrats have garnered through this deal.
This was something Frist had to win, and yet he had to do it in as low-profile a manner as possible, as regards the 2006 elections. I guarantee you, the GOP didn't want the spectacle of a "nuclear option" showdown during a Supreme Court nominee confirmation process. They wanted any such high-profile situation to be a smooth-sailing example of how the GOP provides middle-of-the-road good government, and how impotent Democrats with their extremist agenda had been relegated to irrelevance. And they absolutely wanted all of this to be over long before the midterm elections.
This is about far more than three, or even seven, wacko judicial nominees. It's even about more than the filibuster, the loss of which probably would have benefitted liberals more than it would have hurt, long-term.
Posted by Jonathan at May 24, 2005 05:32 AMVery good point that the rule to change the Senate rules is not changed. This is vital to keep the Senate from becoming like the House.
Posted by Abner Doubleday at May 24, 2005 05:43 AMI posted these comments on steve gilliard's blog:
Ploeg is totally right and Steve is ignoring the end result: (1) Bush put forth an extreme position, (2) the Vichy Democrats compromised, and (3) now the end result is that we are CLOSER to Bush's extreme position.
The Vichy Democrats have agreed that ANYONE to the left of Owens and Brown will be approved as judges on the appellate courts. Note that most of the appellate cases NEVER make it to the Supreme Court, thus the right-wingers are extending their control of the courts of appeals.
What what about the Supreme Court? What is Ginsburg retires and Bush nominates Owens or Brown or someone like them?
Face the truth: this was a strategic defeat for Democrats and maybe a tactial victory over Frist. But Dobson is not going away and Bush's grip on the judiciary just tightened.
OK folks, let's use a sports metaphor. The right-wing just moved the football down the field and got at least a first down near the goal line. They didn't score. Yet.
I understand the disappointment that many of you have, but I keep coming back to a simple number: Reid only had 44 votes to play with, and even the most optimistic calculations up until yesterday afternoon said he could count on only 49 votes in the crunch. So if this had gone all the way, and Reid had lost to a tie-breaking Cheney vote, what would you have by the end of today?
You would have at least five and perhaps all seven of these losers confirmed to the appellate courts, in some cases tipping the balance towards conservatives in these DCAs, and you would have still lost the filibuster for the really big fights coming up. It is now expected that Democrats retain the filibuster for the Supreme Court and other high-stakes votes in the future, and in exchage the moderates prevent the nuclear option until 2007.
Again, this is the best Reid can do with 44 votes and the likes of Lieberman and Nelson running around as free agents. We don't have to like it, but in the big picture, take a look at how pissed off the other side is this morning.
Posted by Steve Soto at May 24, 2005 06:33 AMThe right-wing loons are always complaining about something. Bush didn't get 100%, so they're complaining.
Reid did the best he could do, but this is NOT a victory for us and we should not delude ourselves into thinking it is.
Posted by GayVeteran at May 24, 2005 07:07 AMThe moderate Republicans stood up, and made the Taliban sit down. that is significant. If they could keep doing this, perhaps get some power into old fashioned Republicanism, get the party to support them rather than run extremists against them, perhaps this represents the first step back from the brink. but this is just one small step, and alot more is needed. I hope the Taliban gets mad , takes it's ball and goes home , splits off etc, please do.
Posted by emeldir at May 24, 2005 07:12 AMThe Democrats did not win.
The Republicans got concrete, real benefits, i.e. some of their worst nominees get lifetime appointments. The Democrats got nothing but a vague, easily reneged upon promise. And even that promise expires 18 months from now.
In sum: the Repubs got something real, the Democrats get a short term promise that can be easily jettisoned.
Posted by The Fool at May 24, 2005 07:31 AMI do not possess the political knowledge and experience that Steve does. From my naive viewpoint I fail to see what good came of this and how we are better off. The bar for lifetime appointments to the courts has seriously been lowered. The "moderates" fashioned a victory for Bush. He gets to appoint all the wackos he wants (I'm not impressed that 2 aren't going through this time). And when it comes to the supreme court they'll pull out the nuclear option.
Who cares about Frist and his presidential hopes. The Repubs and their theocratic machine can certainly come up with some one, Jeb?, anyone it doesn't matter. What matters is the adherence to the philosophy and the Christian right. If the moderates who fashioned this deal are also supporting Bolton what does that tell you. Yes the moderates have gained influence simply because they were able to get Bush closer to his goal without serious public fall out. Its win-win for Bush. And Bush doesn't give a rat's a** about Frist. Guys like hime are just cogs in the party machine. He can be replaced.
Lets step back and take an even bigger look at the landscape. Here's what I see. The Dems have rolled over on the following; Election irregularities, the run up to the Iraq war, torture and rendition, the Blair memos, the bankruptcy bill, etc etc. What does that tell you? What it tells me is that as a group they are not that upset with Bush, they believe in the war becausethey know its about the oil and they agree with the approach (Christ isn't this just the Carter doctrine in neocon clothes), and when push comes to shove enough Dems will side with the Corps over the common person to insure a Repub victory like occured for the Bankruptcy bill. When the Dems called for money last week I told them to stick it because as a party they did not represent my interests or those of my children. The bankruptcy bill was the last straw for me.
The Dems are cowards too afraid to risk their time in the political game to stand up for principle. And besides doing so might cost them corporate money. They have no more concern for the long term health of the country than anybody else.
The Republic is dead! Long live the theocracy.
Posted by soccerdad at May 24, 2005 08:00 AMOddly enough, I agree with most of the comments here -- although jonathan's opinions are closest to my own.
Even though this feels like a defeat, it was a victory for the Democrats. If the 50 + 1 precedent for changing the Senate rules had been established, the permanent damage to the country would have been incalculable.
This is more like Washington escaping from Brooklyn Heights with his army intact, instead of being destroyed. Our team, and the filibuster, live to fight another day.
Sometimes, a tactical retreat is more of a victory than is readily apparent. In this case, BushCo's public image is further damaged and the Senate Moderates' position is strengthened -- under the circumstances, that may have been the best we can hope for.
Even if we had won the nuclear showdown 51 to 49, consider the damage than would occurred to the emerging centrist coalition.
We dodged a bullet, and sometimes that's as good as it gets. And by itself, the Frist Dobson smackdown is worth the price of the popcorn.
Posted by ck at May 24, 2005 08:22 AMNature abhors a vacuum, it's inevitable that something fills the center, however broad that something may be.
What is disgisting about the whole thing is the republicans, lock stock and barrel. Those that support frist and dobsen, and those who lack the courage to do what they have to know is right.
Perhaps the impotent howling of the freepers at this point may embolden them, maybe a rock the size of Kansas falling on the planet will, but this is another pushback against the greed and unconstitutional power grasping of grover, rover, and gob, er, godsmackers throughout the land.
The dispicable and failed manipulations of Terri Schiavo was one, when Voinovich pulled away from bolton was another one of those events. And look at the desperate overreaching since then.
No, it ain't much, it ain't pretty, but it lays a foundation that, because of the attention they did garner, makes the future a bit more hopeful.
Posted by Duckman GR at May 24, 2005 09:06 AMThe Victory at Pearl Harbor --
Slightly OT, but a comment on the Pearl Harbor metaphor seems appropriate.
The attack on Pearl Harbor was a humiliation for the USA, but it was both a strategic and tactical defeat for the Japanese. Here's why:
* It ended American Isolationism overnight, and mobilized a righteous anger and grim determination to crush the Japanese aggressors.
* In sinking the American battleships, the Japanese did us a huge favor -- they exposed the battleships for what they were, obsolete floating scrap iron. The capital ships of WWII were aircraft carriers and submarines.
* By missing our aircraft carriers, the US remained at strategic parity with the Japanese.
* By attacking the battleships, the Japanese missed the two most important targets at Pearl Harbor -- the dry docks, and the the oil storage tanks. Had either of those been destroyed, we would have been in a world of hurt.
Yamamoto was right, when he said: "I can run wild for six months ... after that, I have no expectation of success." The Battle of Midway took place on June 4-7, 1942 -- six months to the day after Pearl Harbor. (I was going to cite his 'sleeping giant' quote, but it may be fictional.)
The bottom line is, the seeds of victory often grow from what seems to be ignominious defeat.
Posted by ck at May 24, 2005 09:52 AMHow can we go on calling the seven Republicans involved in the "comprimise " moderates? If they were truly moderate, they would have voted with the Democrats. For if they were really moderates, they too would find the likes of these nominees too extreme. Once again the right wing wins the linguistics war.
Posted by Oaklander at May 24, 2005 09:56 AM