Myth-Fact: Judicial Filibusters

In some ways, the Democratic attempt to stop President Bush's judicial nominees from being appointed is understandable. It is the job of a political party to try to win their way. In this case, though, the Democrats have been voted out of power by the citizens of our nation and they cannot win their way with legitimate means. They are apparently willing to stoop so low as to effectively put the Senate on strike.

Interestingly, when the Democrats were in power in 1995 they also wanted to eliminate the filibuster as a tool in judicial nominations:

It seems Democrats have changed their tune on giving all judicial nominees a fair up-or-down vote. They now claim the filibuster is a sacred tool of the Senate. But in 1995, Democrats, including nine who still serve, voted to rid the Senate of this tool.

That's right, nine current Democratic Senators voted to get rid of the filibuster. Now that it suits their needs, they praise it. What's worse than this hypocrisy is these same Senators now lead the obstruction and threaten to shut down the Senate. Their claims of loyalty to, and reverence for, Senate traditions are just another sham designed to hide their hypocrisy.Read the entire article here.

Nine of the Democrats who voted to end filibusters in 1995 are still serving: Lieberman, Bingaman, Boxer, Feingold, Harkin, Kennedy, Kerry, Lautenberg, Sarbanes.

So far, Republicans under the leadership of Senator Frist are holding firm against allowing filibusters to stop the voting on President Bush's nominees. Let us pray that Republican leadership remains strong.

In the ongoing political fight Democrats have propagated numerous myths. Here are a few of main ones and the facts behind the myths.

Myth #1: Senate Republicans are attempting to abolish all filibusters.
Fact: Republicans are seeking to reestablish the Senate's traditional role in the judicial nomination process, not eliminate all filibusters, an initiative some Democrats have supported in the past. Read the details.

Myth #2: filibusters of judicial nominations are part of Senate tradition.
Fact: having to overcome a filibuster (or obtaining 60 votes) on judicial nominations is unprecedented and has never been the confirmation test for a nominee -- and in the past, even Democrats have called for up or down votes. Read the details.

Myth #3: Democrats want to continue debating these nominations so they can reach a compromise with the Republican majority.
Fact: the Democrats have threatened to shut down the Senate rather than carry out their constitutional obligation to provide an up or down vote on judicial nominees. Read the details.

Myth #4: Democrats treatment of Bush's nominees is analogous to Republicans treatment of Clinton's nominees.
Fact: President Clinton's judicial nominees were not filibustered and never before has a judicial nominee with clear majority support been denied an up-or-down vote on the Senate floor by a filibuster. Read the details.

Myth #5: the Constitutional Option is unprecedented.
Fact: Senate Democrats have used the Constitutional Option in the past. Read the details.

  ¶ 5:51 PM|