Awesome Talking Library   Search:

News Essay Against the "Nuclear Option" for Changing Senate Rules (Law.org) "A group of Republicans, led by Majority Leader Bill Frist, intends to propose a rule change so as to allow a simple majority of senators to cut off debate on judicial nominees. Sen. Frist has referred to judicial filibusters undertaken by the Democrats as 'an affront to the advice-and-consent power of our Constitution.' In fact, the Republican proposal to infringe on the right of the Democrats to speak out on nominees threatens the very balance of power among the three branches of government." 4-05 Papers "Nuclear Option" for Changing Senate Rules (ChangeforAmerica.com) "I have been hearing the press and several Senators including Frist throw around the term 'the nuclear option'. It relates to the possibility that Vice President Cheney will make a 'ruling from the chair' with regard to changing the cloture rule reducing the now required 60 votes to end a filibuster to a simple majority." Since Republicans now have a simple majority, the purpose of this rule is to allow Republicans to approve judges, including Supreme Court Justices, without negotiating with Democrats. 4-05 Essay Supporting the "Nuclear Option" for Changing Senate Rules (CFIF.org) "With a Senate minority now obstructing up-or-down floor votes on several judicial nominations and other nominations languishing for hundreds of days under the threat of filibusters, all while there is a vacancy crisis plaguing the federal appellate bench, the time has certainly come for the Senate majority to seriously consider re-exercising the 'nuclear option.' " "The way this procedural maneuver would work — as it did in 1975 — would be that, at the time of a cloture vote to end debate, the Senate majority would secure a ruling from the chair that Standing Rule XXII does not apply. The chair, likely the Vice President, would probably agree and rule in favor of the majority. The issue would then be brought to a vote, and the minority, probably through the Minority Leader, would note that the issue is debatable and, hence, also subject to a filibuster.""The parliamentarian, relying on Senate precedent, would agree. The chair would then recognize a non-debatable motion to table. At this point, the majority could overrule the anti-majoritarian precedent, uphold the ruling of the chair, and proceed to a final yea-or-nay vote on the original question by securing a simple majority vote in favor of the motion to table." 4-05