Dem. Senators to Frist: WE CALL YOUR BLUFF! (It needs to be shouted!)

Wordie

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Tue Jan-24-06 05:18 PM
Original message

Dem. Senators to Frist: WE CALL YOUR BLUFF! (It needs to be shouted!)

This is what I want the Democratic Senators to do...to call the Republicans bluff on the nuclear option. I posted this in another thread, and a poster suggested it needed it's own thread, so here it is:

We are making the assumption that the Republicans want us to make, that they really would exercise the nuclear option. That is not a certain thing. Frist made the threat at a time when the Republicans were sitting pretty, and Bush was convinced that he had a "mandate" and that he was going to "exercise his political capital." (Remember that?)

The circumstances have changed dramatically. There have been Republican scandals over ethics violations; the President's "mandate" has disappeared, and Republicans are worried that he is going to pull them down with him in their next elections (and for some of them, that means just a few months from now); the President has been caught in a lie to the American public,and when discovered, he not only was not apologetic, he said it was within his purview as the President to exercise his executive authority to do so (Alito is on record supporting the expansion of executive powers). We read in the papers recently that the government has attempted to obtain Google the records of American citizens; after one unpopular war, there are rumors of plans by the Bush administration that we may be led into yet another; high-level Bush administration officials are under indictment.

Yes, the political landscape has changed dramatically since the threat was first made by Frist. Frist has had problems keeping frightened Republicans in line. They jumped ship on the Anti-torture Act, that the President was against, approving it by a huge bi-partisan consensus. Then Bush attached a signing statement, essentially saying he could over-rule any parts of the Anti-torture Act that he didn't like (Alito was the one to develop the use of the signing statement, when he worked for the Reagan White house, and is on record as supporting them as a legitimate tool to expand executive power).

Want more? I could go on. The circumstances are different. We are assuming that the nuclear option would be invoked, because the Republicans have told us so. We should not make that mistake.

Wiki has a lot more to say about the nuclear option. Here is just a bit:

Supporters of the right to filibuster argue that the Senate has a long tradition of requiring broad support to do business, due in part to the threat of the filibuster, and that this protects the minority.

And...
The legality of the nuclear option has been challenged. (emphasis mine) The Senate parliamentarian, Alan Frumin, was appointed by Senator Lott. Furmin is an ostensibly neutral staff member and appointed keeper of the Senate's rules, and is opposed to the nuclear option.<2> It's been reported that a Congressional Research Service report "leaves little doubt" that the nuclear option would not be based on previous precedents of the Senate.<3>

The wiki article about the nuclear option is quite detailed, presents a variety of reasons why it should or could not be invoked, and is well worth a read: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_Option

And all the above doesn't even address whether there are "extraordinary circumstances" which would render the nuclear option moot...